Re: DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly halt (Halting Problem)

On 4/5/2025 6:15 PM, dbush wrote:

On 4/5/2025 7:07 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/5/2025 4:59 PM, dbush wrote:

On 4/5/2025 5:56 PM, olcott wrote:

>
OK great we are making progress.
You agree that the specified DDD and a
hypothetical HHH could meet the
*Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
>

>
Which you will be unable to link back to the halting problem:
>
>
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
>

>
*Yet may be able to link back to this*
>
<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
>
     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>

 Which is not what you think he agreed to:
  On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
 > I exchanged emails with him about this. He does not agree with anything
 > substantive that PO has written. I won't quote him, as I don't have
 > permission, but he was, let's say... forthright, in his reply to me.
 >
 

Yet may be exactly what he agreed to:
*Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
It is always correct for any simulating termination
analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
would otherwise prevent its own termination.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer