Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 -- Ben agrees that Sipser approved criteria is met

On 2024-06-27 17:38:12 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/27/2024 12:25 PM, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:56:56 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/27/2024 10:35 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-27 14:10:02 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/27/2024 2:36 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-26 12:58:59 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/26/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-26 02:29:59 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/25/2024 9:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/25/24 10:05 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/25/2024 8:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/25/24 1:45 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/25/2024 9:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

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

On 6/25/2024 4:22 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:47:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/22/2024 1:39 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 21.jun.2024 om 15:21 schreef olcott:

 

If this was true then everyone here would already know that H(P,P)
is not even being asked about the behavior of the directly executed
P(P).

 Everyone knwos that H(P,P) is not asked anything.
 

In computability theory and computational complexity theory, a
decision problem is a computational problem that can be posed as a
yes–no question of the input values.

 That's right. But that question cannot be presented to the decider.
Only the input values can.
 

In other words you are saying that Turing machines do not typically
understand English.

 

No. The input is merely a variable in the question. The question is
implicit.
 

Not at all. That is flat out incorrect.

You are wrong. The input is the variable in the question. The question
is not a part of the input.

The input is a specific finite string of bytes that
has the semantics of the x86 programming language.

For a decider that is made for that sort of input. But there cannot be
any question in that input.

None-the-less no-one here understands that every halt decider is only
required to report on the behavior that its actual input actually maps
to.

 

That is a tautology: „It must simulate that way that it can.”
But it is not free to make something up and claim itself infallible
 

DDD correctly simulated by H0 cannot possible halt.
The same thing goes for the conventional halting problem input.
 

Instead everyone here expects that the halt decider must map to the
English description of what the authors of textbooks expect it to map
to.

 

That is the definition of a halt decider. If it does not fit that
definition, it is not one.
 

 We could "define" a zipangnitfark as a square circle
that has a radius of a zebra with each equally
length side having the length of a misconception.
 Some definitions ARE incorrect.

That definition is not incorrect. It may be unsuitable for your purposes
but that does not make it incorrect. All parts of a good definition are
there: the term for the concept, the superconcept, and the differentiating
feature. Definitions like this would be a great improvement to your
writings.
--
Mikko