Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --Categorically Exhaustive Reasoning--

On 3/15/2024 10:57 PM, immibis wrote:

On 16/03/24 04:29, olcott wrote:

On 3/15/2024 10:17 PM, immibis wrote:

On 16/03/24 03:18, olcott wrote:

It means that every H(D,D) that correctly determines by a partial
simulation of its input: "H correctly simulates its input D until"
that "D would never stop running unless aborted" that this H(D,D)
<is> necessarily correct.

>
And what does that mean?

>

saying non-halting as it now is looking at a TOTALLY new set of input.
>
You don't seem very "Exhaustive" in your reasoning.
>

>
// The categorically exhaustive part
For every H(D,D) of the infinite set of encodings of H
that simulate their input

>
And what does that mean?
>

I am trying to make my words as clear as possible so reviews
like this one are very helpful.
>
There cannot possibly exist any H(D,D) that is called by
D where H(D,D) simulates its input and D(D) stops running
and H never aborts its simulation.

 And what does THAT mean? What is "any H(D,D)"?
 

*software engineering and set theory*
Every C function named H(D,D) that simulates its input and
D(D) calls H(D,D) never stops running unless aborted by H.

I think you are probably using words in a different way than everyone else so it would be nice to understand your words as well as I understand Turing machines.
 

>

 >
 > *no D(D) ever stops running unless aborted by H*

>

 

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer