Re: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true? --- Self-Modifying Turing Machine

Am Fri, 19 Jul 2024 09:18:05 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/19/2024 2:49 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-17 13:22:09 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/17/2024 2:32 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-16 14:04:18 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/16/2024 6:53 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/15/24 10:51 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/15/2024 2:40 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/15/2024 2:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 15.jul.2024 om 04:33 schreef olcott:

On 7/14/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/14/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:

Can't. Since programs are unchanging, their properties can not
change.

Your complier cannot produce self-modifying code.

My compiler can accept assembly language that can derive
self-modifying code.

Using non-standard extensions of the language may indeed permit that
unless the program is loaded to a read-only memory. The compiler is
designed so that ordinary programs can be loaded to read-only memory.
Some operating systems prevent programs from modifying themselves as if
the program were in a read-only memory, and typical compilers compile
so that the program can be run under such operating systems.

The bottom line is that an actual TM can modify its own code while it is
running when it has access to its own TM description and it is only
simulated by a UTM. In this case it can modify itself so that its input
is no longer contradictory.

Oh no. A running TM cannot change its transition table. Even then,
its description would include the selfmodification.
Being simulated does not change anything, as the simulated machine
is not aware of that.

When a Self-Modifying Turing Machine can change itself to become any
other Turing Machine then it can eliminate the pathological relationship
to its input.

I think not, because the selfmodification is built into it. It is
different from the version that doesn't have that.

--
Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:
Objectively I am a genius.