Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V2

On 6/17/2024 2:32 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-16 12:44:41 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 6/16/2024 2:50 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-15 13:14:57 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 6/15/2024 7:19 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-15 03:07:14 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 6/13/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > On 6/13/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
 >>
 >> It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of how H computes
 >> 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 that reaches the
 >> behavior of the directly executed D(D)
 >>
 >
 > Why? I don't claim it can.
>
_D()
[00000cfc](01) 55          push ebp
[00000cfd](02) 8bec        mov ebp,esp
[00000cff](03) 8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00000d02](01) 50          push eax       ; push D
[00000d03](03) 8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00000d06](01) 51          push ecx       ; push D
[00000d07](05) e800feffff  call 00000b0c  ; call H
[00000d0c](03) 83c408      add esp,+08
[00000d0f](02) 85c0        test eax,eax
[00000d11](02) 7404        jz 00000d17
[00000d13](02) 33c0        xor eax,eax
[00000d15](02) eb05        jmp 00000d1c
[00000d17](05) b801000000  mov eax,00000001
[00000d1c](01) 5d          pop ebp
[00000d1d](01) c3          ret
Size in bytes:(0034) [00000d1d]
>
If there is no mapping from the input to H(D,D) to the behavior
of D(D) then H is not even being asked about the behavior of D(D).
H has no obligation to answer questions *THAT IT IS NOT BEING ASKED*

>
The halting problem specification does not say that a halt decider
can be asked questions.

>
*It assumes that you already know that*

>
What assumes? Why would it assume anything about me?
>

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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_problem

>
That's true. But a decider cannot be asked a question.

>
The input to a decider is isomorphic to a yes or no question.

 What isomorphism would that be? Would it cover all yes-or-no questions?
 

Whenever a
decider is run it answers the question it is made to answer.

>
Not necessarily.

 If doesn't it is not a decider. If it does but not correctly it is
not a decider of the required kind.
 

Just because everyone falsely assumes that D
correctly simulated by H must have the same behavior as the
directly executed D(D) does not make this false assumption true.

 The D correctly or otherwise simulated by H is the same D as
in the directly executed D(D). Direct execution simply means
that it is simulated by a simulator.
 

The
input to the decider is a part of the question but is not itself
a question.

>
The combination of the input and the algorithm is the question.
H is only asked about the behavior of D correctly simulated by H
and is not asked about the behavior of the directly executed D(D).
>
Just because everyone assumes that they must be the same does not
make this assumption correct.
>

However, every decision problem can be presented differently,
whithout posing a qeustion.

>
That is incorrect.

 Then show a decision problem that cannot be presented except
as a question.
 

It will only address that here
[Simulating termination analyzers for dummies]
It has all of the reasoning in one place not strewn
about here and there.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer