Re: Defining a correct simulating halt decider

Am Thu, 05 Sep 2024 08:24:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/5/2024 2:34 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-09-03 13:00:50 +0000, olcott said:

On 9/3/2024 5:25 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-09-02 16:38:03 +0000, olcott said:
>

A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from
its finite string input to the behavior that this finite string
specifies.

>
A halt decider needn't compute the full behaviour, only whether that
behaviour is finite or infinite.

>

Nice to see that you don't disagree with what said. Unvortunately I
can't agree with what you say.
HHH terminates, so DDD obviously terminates, too. No valid
C interpretaion of allows DDD to continue forever after HHH jas
terminated.

DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state. It looks like I
have to repeat this 10,000 times before anyone ever notices that I said
it at least once.

We have noticed.

Show the details of how DDD emulated by HHH reaches its own machine
address 0000217f.

By HHH returning, which we are guaranteed from its definition as a
decider.

--
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.