Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --self-evident truth--

On 3/16/24 9:11 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2024 10:59 PM, immibis wrote:

On 17/03/24 04:47, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2024 10:19 PM, immibis wrote:

On 17/03/24 03:35, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2024 9:26 PM, immibis wrote:

On 17/03/24 01:50, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2024 7:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/16/24 8:29 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/15/2024 11:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/15/24 8:45 PM, olcott wrote:

H(D,D) fails to make the required mistake of reporting on what it does not see.

>
But it DOES make a mistake, because it does answer the question correctly.
>
You are just PROVING you think lying is ok.
>
You TOTALLY don't understand the meaning of truth.
>
You are REALLY just a Pathological Liar, as you have no concept of real truth,
>

>
The original halt status criteria has the impossible requirement
that H(D,D) must report on behavior that it does not actually see.
Requiring H to be clairvoyant is an unreasonable requirement.
*The criteria shown below eliminate the requirement of clairvoyance*
>
(a) 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 correctly simulates its input D until*
Means H does a correct partial simulation of D until H correctly
matches the recursive simulation non-halting behavior pattern.
>
>

>
But turning out to be impposible, doesn't make it incorrect or invalid.

>
*You seems to be ridiculously disingenuous about the self-evident truth*
For every possible way that H can be encoded and D(D) calls H(D,D) either H(D,D) aborts its simulation or D(D) never stops running.
>

>
For every possible way that H can be encoded, H(D,D) aborts its simulation.

>
That does not correspond to the specification of H shown immediately
above that only has H(D,D) simulate its input and does not even require
H to ever stop running.

>
It corresponds to the actual H that you wrote.

>
For every possible way that H can be encoded and D(D) calls H(D,D)
either H(D,D) aborts its simulation or D(D) never stops running.

>
For every possible way that H can be encoded, it aborts its simulation. If it doesn't abort, then it's a different piece of code, not H.

 H is an algorithm that simulates its input and correctly
determines whether or not it needs to abort this simulation.
That is all that this thread's H does.
 

And what defines "Need"?
Note, if H is an algorithm, we can't talk of "changing" it, or it looses its identity.
NOTE, You didn't answer the question, so I will presume you can't deny the implication.