Re: Defining a correct simulating halt decider

On 2024-09-07 13:57:00 +0000, olcott said:

On 9/7/2024 3:29 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-09-07 05:12:19 +0000, joes said:
 

Am Fri, 06 Sep 2024 06:42:48 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/6/2024 6:19 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-09-05 13:24:20 +0000, olcott said:

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.
 

New slave_stack at:1038c4 Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation

 

Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
 Hence  HHH(DDD)==0 is correct

 Nice to see that you don't disagree with what said.
Unvortunately I can't agree with what you say.
HHH terminates,
os DDD obviously terminates, too. No valid

 DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.

 If that iis true it means that HHH called by DDD does not return and
therefore is not a ceicder.

The directly executed HHH is a decider.

What does simulating it change about that?

 If the simulation is incorrect it may change anything.
 

PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR

However, a correct simultation faithfully imitates the original
behaviour.
--
Mikko