Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s logic 
Sujet : Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 27. May 2024, 16:25:56
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v3255k$2pkb$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/27/2024 8:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/26/24 11:47 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/26/2024 10:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/26/24 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/26/2024 10:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/26/24 10:43 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/26/2024 9:06 PM, olcott wrote:
When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>
  Ĥ copies its own Turing machine description: ⟨Ĥ⟩
  then invokes embedded_H that simulates ⟨Ĥ⟩ with ⟨Ĥ⟩ as input.
>
It is an easily verified fact that ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by
embedded_H cannot possibly reach its own simulated final state of
⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ in any finite sequence of steps.
>
*To other reviewers that are not dishonest*
The complete proof of the above statement is that when we hypothesize
that embedded_H is a UTM we can see that:
>
i.e. when we assume it is something it isn't, i.e we LIE to ourselves.
>
If you assume embedded_H is something it isn't,
>
Not at all.
*It looks like you may be utterly clueless about what-if scenarios*
You can only ask what-ifs about things that are possible.
>
>
What-if embedded_H was a UTM would ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated
by embedded_H reach its own simulated final state of ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ ?
(a) YES
(b) NO
(c) DISHONEST HONEST ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT
>
So, If your H was a UTM, and H^ built on that, then embedded_H would be a UTM and H^ (H^) would be non-halting as would H (H^) (H^).
>
>
*Great this is a step of progress*
This conclusively proves that ⟨Ĥ⟩ will not reach ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ is less than
an infinite number of steps. A decider is not allowed to simulate
an infinite number of steps.
 First, it doesn't "Prove" it,
*Sure it does, you just like to deny verified facts*
When ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by embedded_H cannot possibly reach its
own simulated final state of ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ and halt in an infinite number of
simulated steps
then it can't possibly reach its own simulated final state of ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ and halt in less than an infinite (AKA a finite) number of simulated steps.
*When infinity is not enough then less than infinity is also not enough*
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
23 May 24 * Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?146olcott
24 May 24 +* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?23Richard Damon
24 May 24 i+* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?10olcott
24 May 24 ii`* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?9Richard Damon
24 May 24 ii `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?8olcott
24 May 24 ii  `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?7Richard Damon
24 May 24 ii   `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?6olcott
24 May 24 ii    `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?5Richard Damon
24 May 24 ii     `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?4olcott
24 May 24 ii      `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?3Richard Damon
24 May 24 ii       `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?2olcott
25 May 24 ii        `- Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?1Richard Damon
24 May 24 i`* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?12Fred. Zwarts
24 May 24 i +* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?5Richard Damon
24 May 24 i i`* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?4olcott
24 May 24 i i `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?3Richard Damon
24 May 24 i i  `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?2olcott
25 May 24 i i   `- Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?1Richard Damon
24 May 24 i `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?6olcott
24 May 24 i  `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?5Richard Damon
24 May 24 i   `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?4olcott
24 May 24 i    `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?3Richard Damon
24 May 24 i     `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?2olcott
25 May 24 i      `- Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?1Richard Damon
24 May 24 `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?122Fred. Zwarts
24 May 24  `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?121olcott
24 May 24   `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?120Richard Damon
24 May 24    `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?119olcott
24 May 24     `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?118Richard Damon
24 May 24      `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?117olcott
25 May 24       +- Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?1Richard Damon
25 May 24       `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?115olcott
25 May 24        `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?114Richard Damon
25 May 24         `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?113olcott
25 May 24          `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?112Richard Damon
25 May 24           `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?111olcott
25 May 24            +* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?108Richard Damon
25 May 24            i`* D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06107olcott
25 May 24            i `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06106Richard Damon
25 May 24            i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06105olcott
25 May 24            i   +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06103Richard Damon
25 May 24            i   i`* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06102olcott
25 May 24            i   i `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06101Richard Damon
25 May 24            i   i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06100olcott
25 May 24            i   i   `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0699Richard Damon
25 May 24            i   i    `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0698olcott
25 May 24            i   i     `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0697Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i      +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 066olcott
26 May 24            i   i      i`* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 065Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i      i `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 064olcott
26 May 24            i   i      i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 063Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i      i   `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 062olcott
26 May 24            i   i      i    `- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 061Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i      `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0690olcott
26 May 24            i   i       `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0689Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i        `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0688olcott
26 May 24            i   i         `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0687Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i          `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0686olcott
26 May 24            i   i           `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0685Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i            `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0684olcott
26 May 24            i   i             `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0683Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i              `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0682olcott
26 May 24            i   i               `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0681Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 062olcott
26 May 24            i   i                i`- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 061Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0678olcott
26 May 24            i   i                 `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 0677Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                  +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 066olcott
26 May 24            i   i                  i`* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 065Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                  i +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 062olcott
26 May 24            i   i                  i i`- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 061Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                  i `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 062olcott
26 May 24            i   i                  i  `- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 061Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                  `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?70olcott
26 May 24            i   i                   `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?69Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                    `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?68olcott
26 May 24            i   i                     `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?67Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                      `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?66olcott
26 May 24            i   i                       `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?65Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                        `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 ---64olcott
26 May 24            i   i                         `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 ---63Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                          `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 ---62olcott
26 May 24            i   i                           `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 ---61Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                            +* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz proof4olcott
26 May 24            i   i                            i`* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz proof3Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                            i `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz proof2olcott
26 May 24            i   i                            i  `- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz proof1Richard Damon
26 May 24            i   i                            `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz56olcott
26 May 24            i   i                             `* Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 06 --- Linz55Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                              `* A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩54olcott
27 May 24            i   i                               `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩53Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩52olcott
27 May 24            i   i                                 `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩51Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                  +* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩4olcott
27 May 24            i   i                                  i`* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩3Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                  i `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩2olcott
27 May 24            i   i                                  i  `- Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩1Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                  `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩46olcott
27 May 24            i   i                                   +* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩3Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                   i`* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩2olcott
27 May 24            i   i                                   i `- Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩1Richard Damon
27 May 24            i   i                                   `* Re: A simulating halt decider applied to the The Peter Linz Turing Machine description ⟨Ĥ⟩42olcott
25 May 24            i   `- Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach its, own line 061Alan Mackenzie
26 May 24            `* Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?2Fred. Zwarts

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal