Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 11. May 2025, 11:49:49
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <64265f55da1123eca058dc30d4071a9e30e5d70c@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Sat, 10 May 2025 20:49:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 5/10/2025 8:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/10/25 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/10/2025 6:56 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2025 18:40:53 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:

And the problem is that you use incorrect categories.
The decider needs to be of the category "Program".
The input also needs to be of the category "Program", but provided
via a representation. The act of representation lets us convert
items of category Program to the category of Finite String which can
be an input.
>
Those two categories you have identified are different hence the
category error.
>
That is correct. A running program and an input finite string ARE NOT
THE SAME.
 
But there is a direct relationship between the two.
 
The key thing is that they don't always have the same behavior.
A representation doesn't have any behaviour at all, the program it
represents does.

When they do have different behavior
...the direct execution can't be wrong.

It is not allowed to ignore this on the basis that the direct execution
or UTM simulation has no recursive simulation.
The direct execution has recursive simulation just the same.

--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
10 May 25 * Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's37Richard Damon
11 May 25 +- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
11 May 25 +* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's24olcott
11 May 25 i+* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's22Richard Damon
11 May 25 ii+* Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.4olcott
11 May 25 iii+- Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.1Richard Damon
11 May 25 iii+- Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.1joes
11 May 25 iii`- Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.1Fred. Zwarts
11 May 25 ii+- Re: Recursive simulation must be reported and not ignored.1Richard Damon
11 May 25 ii+* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's14olcott
11 May 25 iii+* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's4olcott
11 May 25 iiii`* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's3olcott
11 May 25 iiii `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's2olcott
11 May 25 iiii  `- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1olcott
11 May 25 iii+- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
11 May 25 iii+* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's2Richard Damon
11 May 25 iiii`- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
12 May 25 iii`* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's6Mikko
12 May 25 iii +* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's2Richard Heathfield
12 May 25 iii i`- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Mikko
12 May 25 iii `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's3olcott
13 May 25 iii  +- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
13 May 25 iii  `- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Mikko
11 May 25 ii+- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Heathfield
11 May 25 ii`- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
11 May 25 i`- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Heathfield
11 May 25 `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's11joes
11 May 25  +- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1joes
11 May 25  +- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon
12 May 25  `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's8Mikko
12 May 25   `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's7olcott
12 May 25    +* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's5Richard Heathfield
12 May 25    i`* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's4olcott
12 May 25    i +- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25    i `* Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's2Mikko
13 May 25    i  `- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Heathfield
13 May 25    `- Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's1Richard Damon

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal