Sujet : Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 14. May 2025, 23:25:52
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <100359g$2mtsb$10@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/14/2025 4:32 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 14/05/2025 21:50, dbush wrote:
On 5/14/2025 11:44 AM, olcott wrote:
<snip>
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
would never stop running unless aborted then
THE SPEC REQUIRES A PARTIAL SIMULATION OF SOME INPUTS.
>
Simulation is not a requirement, merely an implementation detail. Mapping the halting function is the requirement:
I think Mr Olcott sees simulation as a requirement, if not /the/ requirement.
This whole post and every single message is only
about how HHH/DDD and HHH/DD meet the EXACT WORDS
OF THE ABOVE SPEC. All divergence from this was
a dishonest dodge.
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer