Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/12/2025 1:20 PM, dbush wrote:Nope, and he has made it clear that you references to his statements are a misinterpresation, and thus your repeating the claim is just proof that you are just a deliberate liar. No "Honest Mistake", but just the blantant unabashed lying even though you know the statement to be incorrect.On 5/12/2025 2:17 PM, olcott wrote:*Ben already acknowledged that the requirements have been met*Introduction to the Theory of Computation 3rd Edition>
by Michael Sipser (Author)
4.4 out of 5 stars 568 rating
>
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael- Sipser/ dp/113318779X
>
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
>
DD correctly simulated by any pure simulator
named HHH cannot possibly terminate thus proving
that this criteria has been met:
>
<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 is not what you thought he agreed to:
>
>
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> I exchanged emails with him about this. He does not agree with anything
> substantive that PO has written. I won't quote him, as I don't have
> permission, but he was, let's say... forthright, in his reply to me.
>
On 10/17/2022 10:23 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> ...D(D) would not halt unless H stops the simulation.
> H /can/ correctly determine this silly criterion (in this one case)...
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.