Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---

On 10/30/2024 6:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/30/24 12:10 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/29/2024 10:50 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote:

On 10/29/2024 8:50 AM, Andy Walker wrote:

On 29/10/2024 13:56, olcott wrote:

To the best of my knowledge no one besides me ever came up with the
idea of making a simulating halt decider / emulating termination
analyzer.

>
     The /idea/ is ancient, and certainly dates back at least to the
1970s.  For a relatively informal discussion, see paragraph 3 of
>
   http://www.cuboid.me.uk/anw/G12FCO/lect18.html
>
intended for second-year undergraduates and present on the web from 1996
[though then as a Nottingham University web page].  I certainly didn't
invent the idea.  The same page includes some stuff about Busy Beavers.
You, and perhaps others, may also find some of the surrounding pages
[linked from that one] interesting, eg the stuff about UTMs and about
minimal computers.  Again, I am not claiming credit for inventing any
of this.

>
You may have noticed that the moron responded to your message in less than 10 minutes. Do you think he read the material before responding? A good troll would have waited a few hours before answering.

>
Announced how I reviewed it and Richard correctly corrected me.
It is still wrong, but for a different reason. It rejects the
self-evident truth of this idea:

  Which just proves that you thnk LYING is ok, and that you regularly LIE in what you say,
 

>
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
     stop running unless aborted then
>
     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>

 Which means that if H can determine that a CORRECTLY (which to Professr Sipser means completely) Simulation of THIS input would not halt.
 

No stupid he says that he does not mean that.
simulates its input D until H correctly determines
simulates its input D until H correctly determines
simulates its input D until H correctly determines
simulates its input D until H correctly determines
until does not mean forever, how stupid can you get?
until does not mean forever, how stupid can you get?
until does not mean forever, how stupid can you get?
until does not mean forever, how stupid can you get?
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer