Sujet : Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 07. Aug 2024, 19:14:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v90di8$38oni$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/7/2024 1:02 PM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 07 Aug 2024 08:54:41 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 8/7/2024 2:29 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-08-05 13:49:44 +0000, olcott said:
I know what it means. But the inflected form "emulated" does not mean
what you apparently think it means. You seem to think that "DDD
emulated by HHH" means whatever HHH thinks DDD means but it does not.
DDD means what it means whether HHH emulates it or not.
>
In other words when DDD is defined to have a pathological relationship
to HHH we can just close our eyes and ignore it and pretend that it
doesn't exist?
It doesn't change anything about DDD. HHH was supposed to decide anything
and can't fulfill that promise. That doesn't mean that DDD is somehow
faulty, it's just a counterexample.
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
*HHH is required to report on the behavior of DDD*
Anyone that does not understand that HHH meets this criteria
has insufficient understanding.
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
stop running unless aborted then
I can't imagine that any expert in the C language can say
that HHH does not meet this criteria without lying. All
four of them that answered agreed that it does. Two of
these four have MSCS.
If most everyone here hardly knows C at all that would
be quite a shock to me.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer