Sujet : Re: Turing computable functions
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 25. Mar 2025, 23:42:22
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <efbd8618684b829ad9d56bc86c31c95a30909f80@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/25/25 5:42 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/25/2025 4:02 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/25/2025 4:50 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/25/2025 3:05 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/25/2025 3:47 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/25/2025 2:32 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/25/2025 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
Cannot possibly derive any outputs not computed from
their inputs.
>
Correct, algorithms can only compute computable mathematical function.
>
>
A Turing machine halt decider
>
Does not exist because the required mapping is not computable:
>
>
Given any algorithm (i.e. a fixed immutable sequence of instructions) X described as <X> with input Y:
>
A solution to the halting problem is an algorithm H that computes the following mapping:
>
(<X>,Y) maps to 1 if and only if X(Y) halts when executed directly
(<X>,Y) maps to 0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt when executed directly
>
>
>
cannot possibly report
on the behavior of any directly executing process.
No Turing machine can every do this. This has always
been beyond what any Turing machine can ever do.
>
>
Strawman: reporting on an executing process is not a requirement.
>
YOU JUST SAID THAT IT WAS
YOU KEEP MINDLESSLY REPEATING THAT IT IS
>
On 3/25/2025 2:32 PM, dbush wrote:
> (<X>,Y) maps to 1 if and only if X(Y) halts when executed directly
>
>
>
I never said it had to actually watch an executing process, only report what would happen if it did run.
>
>
*It has been conclusively proven as a verified*
*fact many hundreds of times over several years*
That the behavior that the finite string input specifies
>
Is
NOT ALWAYS
Yes, ALWAYS, for a Halt Decider.
the behavior of directly executing the described Turing machine.
WHEN THIS FINITE STRING DEFINES A PATHOLOGICAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH ITS SIMULATING TERMINATION ANALYZER.
And where are you getting this rule from?
It seems out your arse because it is just your POOP.
I can't help but believe that ALL of my reviewers are
flat out dishonest on this one point.
We aren't, it is YOU who is the dishonest one, but are too stupid to see your stupid errors.
Turing computable functions
Re: Turing computable functions