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

On 6/28/2024 4:25 AM, Mikko wrote:

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:
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 the machine address of the finite string
of x86 machine code.

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.
 

The question is:
Does this finite string of machine code specify behavior
that terminates normally?

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 has type mismatch errors making it incorrect.
If I ask you how many kilos do your misconceptions
weigh you cannot provide a correct answer because
of the type mismatch error in the question.

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.
 

Incoherent definitions are incorrect definitions.
When I define Snitfinbangflizzledroop as the square-root
of misconceptions about the US constitution my definition
is incorrect because there is no mapping from the input
of misconceptions about the US constitution to any square-root
value.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer