Re: V5 --- Professor Sipser

Am Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:06:37 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 8/22/2024 3:21 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 21.Aug.2024 OM 20:52 olcott:

>
You keep missing the idea that HHH does a partial simulation of DDD to
predict what would happen if this HHH never aborted its simulation of
DDD.

You keep missing the idea that HHH must predict the behaviour of its
input (the HHH that does a partial simulation), not the behaviour of a
different hypothetical non-input (the HHH that never aborted).

 
The would be stupid. If that was the case then HHH could ignore its
input and accept every input as halting including this one:
void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
}

But that program doesn’t call its own (aborting) simulator HHH.
DDD changes with its simulator, because it calls it.

There is a reason why HHH has an input. If it were correct to predict
the behaviour of a hypothetical non-input, then HHH would not need an
input.

That is stupid

Yes, it would.

Are you still cheating with the Root variable to change the behaviour
of HHH from an input to a non-input?

--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.