Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 7/1/2025 3:28 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Trying to correct a correct statement is not very professional.Op 01.jul.2025 om 03:34 schreef olcott:*I keep correcting you on this and you keep ignoring my correction*On 6/30/2025 8:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 6/30/25 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:>On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 22:39:10 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:>
>On 6/29/25 3:51 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:>On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 15:00:35 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:>
>Remember, the simulator must be simulating the INPUT, and thus to goNo. If HHH is simulating DDD then HHH can detect a call to itself being
past the call HHH instruction, the code must be part of the input, and
the input needs to be a constant.
passed DDD within DDD and can assert at that point that the input is
non-
halting.
>
/Flibble
And thus isn't simu;ating THE INPUT, and that the input isn't a PROGRAM.
>
Also, what if DDD is using a copy of HHH, as per the proof program,
which might have variations in the code.
>
Sorry, just shows you don't understand the problem.
No. A simulator does not have to run a simulation to completion if it can
determine that the input, A PROGRAM, never halts.
>
/Flibble
Right, but the program of the input DOES halt.
>
The directly executed DDD() *IS NOT AN INPUT*
Directly executed Turing machines have always been
outside of the domain of any function computed by
a Turing machine therefore directly executed Turing
machines have never contradicted the decision of
any halt decider.
>
Halt deciders compute the mapping from the behavior
that their finite string inputs actually specifies.
>
>
The input is a pointer to a 'finite string' that includes the code of DDD and all functions called by it, in particular including the code to abort and halt.
The measure is DDD simulated by HHH reaching its simulated "return"As usual claims without evidence.
statement final halt state. HHH continues to simulated DDD as a
pure simulator (that also simulates itself simulating DDD) until
HHH sees the non-terminating pattern.
Even more professional experts agree that halting behaviour is specified by the input and that HHH is wrong.Therefore, even a beginner can see that this input specifies a halting program. That your HHH cannot see that, does not change the specification.Five chatbots all agree that the input to HHH(DDD) specifies
non-terminating recursive emulation even though DDD() halts.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.