Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten

On 6/12/2024 6:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 6:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 12:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 6:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

>
As I pointed out, there ARE finite-string transformations that do it, that is a UTM.
>

>
On 5/29/2021 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/dTvIY5NX6b4/m/cHR2ZPgPBAAJ
>
Unless you show every single step of D correctly simulated
by H that reaches the simulated "ret" of D all you have
is bluster utterly bereft of any supporting reasoning.

>
Why, because the claim isn't about the simulate by H, but the behavior of the difectly executed D(D), or its simulation by a UTM.
>

>
H(D,D) must compute the mapping from its finite string input
transforming the finite string of its input into the behavior
that it specifies using finite string transformation rules.

 Yes, it only CAN do what it can compute, but what it MUST do is answer the question posed to it, which might be impossible. And that Question is about the behavior of the direct execution of the machine represented by its input.
 

*H is not even being asked that question*
H is being asked about the behavior that its finite string
inputs maps to via a set of finite string transformation rules.
H is not answering the question that is in your head.
H is answering the question that it is being asked.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer