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

On 6/14/2024 6:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/14/24 8:05 AM, olcott wrote:

On 6/13/2024 12:26 PM, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:08:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/13/2024 9:35 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/13/2024 3:49 AM, joes wrote:

Am Wed, 12 Jun 2024 18:25:14 -0500 schrieb olcott:

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:

>

*H DOES NOT simply guess what you think it should do and do that*

Indeed, it must compute and it must be right.

It has a *specification* it must fulfill.

The specification is "calculate whether a particular program with a
particular input halts".

Yes that <is> what the textbooks say, none-the-less halt deciders really
cannot read textbooks. Instead they go by the behavior that their input
specifies.

And their programming. And we can change which machine/program we are
looking at, if we've got one that isn't up to spec.
>

All halt deciders compute the mapping from their inputs...

All Turing machines do.
>

When we actually compute the mapping from the x86 machine language
finite string input to H(D,D) using the finite string transformation
rules specified by the semantics of the x86 programming language this
DOES NOT MAP TO THE BEHAVIOR OF D(D).

>
It is impossible to encode the H/D pair such that
we can even ask H: Does (D) halt you ignorant troll.
>

 If we can't, the H just failed at the begining.
 But, by your definition, all we need to do is give it the full x86 assembly code of the full program D
 

If no H that can possibly exist can figure out how to
map its finite string x86 machine language to the behavior
of D(D) then H is correct to report on the behavior that
this finite string actually does map to.
int sum(int x, int y){ return x + y; }
It is simply flat out incorrect to expect sum(3,4) to
return the sum of 5 + 6.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer