Re: Defining a correct simulating halt decider

Op 04.sep.2024 om 15:06 schreef olcott:

On 9/4/2024 4:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 03.sep.2024 om 22:25 schreef olcott:

On 9/3/2024 2:01 PM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 03 Sep 2024 13:40:08 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/3/2024 9:42 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 02 Sep 2024 16:06:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/2/2024 12:52 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 02.sep.2024 om 18:38 schreef olcott:

A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from
its finite string input to the behavior that this finite string
specifies.
If the finite string machine string machine description specifies
that it cannot possibly reach its own final halt state then this
machine description specifies non-halting behavior.

Which DDD does not.

DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its final halt state no matter
what HHH does.

But DDD halts, so it „specifies halting behaviour”.
HHH can’t simulate itself.
>

>
HHH does simulate itself simulating DDD
why do you insist on lying about this?
>
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c

HHH *tries* to simulate itself, but it fails to reach the end of its simulation of the halting program.

 The source code proves otherwise that you are not bright
enough to understand this code is no rebuttal at all.
 

Olcott's only rebuttal is a ad hominem attacks.
No evidence for another incorrect claim.
Even olcott agreed that HHH cannot reach the end of DDD and now he contradicts himself.
The source code describes a halting program. Just as the finite string that is the result of the source code and is given to HHH as input.
This same finite string, when given for direct execution, when simulated by the unmodified world class simulator and when processed by HHH1, describe a halting program.
But olcott's HHH fails to reach the end of this program.
This is not unexpected, because HHH cannot possible simulate itself correctly up to the end.