Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 3/25/2025 5:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 3/25/25 6:07 PM, olcott wrote:On 3/25/2025 4:16 PM, joes wrote:Am Tue, 25 Mar 2025 14:24:07 -0500 schrieb olcott:
A partial simulation is not a complete simulation (non-haltingEEE emulates a finite number of steps EEE including EEE emulatingWhen an input finite string specifies a pathological relationshipThe relationship doesn't derive anything.
with its simulating halt decider the actual behavior that
pathological relationship derives must be reported because THAT IS
THE BEHAVIOR THAT IS SPECIFIED BY THIS INPUT FINITE STRING.
It is a tautology that a simulator reports what it reports. That
doesn't make that correct.
itself emulating III a finite number of times.
Sure looks like EEE is faulty here.III has different behavior when emulated by any EEE than when it is
emulated by any other emulator.
When III is emulated by EEE it never reaches its final halt state.
When III is emulated by any other emulator it ALWAYS reaches its final
halt state.
ALWAYS is the opposite of NEVER.
Yes, that's the problem.Since you defined that EEE wasn't a UTM, its result is allowed to beThe same thing works for UTMs too yet they do not have such a concise
subjective.
fully specified language where we can directly see every micro-step of
the algorithm.
>The behavior of III is, and always is, the behavior of its directYou have already said that there is no complete emulation.
execution or the complete emulation of it by a REAL UTM, which for ALL
No, III has no loop. You are confusing different simulation levels.your EEEs that only emulate a finite number of steps and then returnIt is the III emulated by the EEEs that never halt.
will always be to HALT.
Note, none of those EEE ever showed the ACTUAL behavior of their input,The behavior of III is
as that is BY DEFINITION, the behavior of that emulation by the UTM.
[00002172] [00002173] [00002175] [0000217a]...
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.