Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

In order to dial out, it is necessary to broaden one's dimension.


computers / comp.ai.philosophy / Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem

SubjectAuthor
* Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theoremolcott
`- Re: Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the haltingRichard Damon

1
Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem

<tsea9u$28brs$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10625&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10625

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy comp.software-eng sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.software-eng,sci.logic
Subject: Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 15:32:45 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <tsea9u$28brs$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 21:32:46 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0ddc32f194dc1f71b6625a7393c844e5";
logging-data="2371452"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18/X3GZIwh/EoI61JWE4l/6"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.7.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rTKpqHbHr6UAEliNjYCoY3UNJd8=
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Mon, 13 Feb 2023 21:32 UTC

void E(int (*x)())
{ HH(x, x);
return;
}

int main()
{ HH(E,E);
}

HH only needs to simulate E until HH correctly detects that E has a
repeating state such that E correctly simulated by HH cannot possibly
reach its own final state and terminate normally in any finite number of
steps.

Because it is an easily verified fact that
E correctly simulated by HH
cannot possibly halt (reach its own "return" instruction and terminate
normally)

HH is necessarily correct to abort its simulation of E and reject
E correctly simulated by HH

as non-halting as soon as it detects the repeating state in
E correctly simulated by HH

The repeating state that we and HH can both see is that
E correctly simulated by HH
would continue to call HH(E,E) in recursive simulation

Making it impossible for
E correctly simulated by H
to reach its own "return" instruction and terminate normally (AKA halt).

straw man
An intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is
easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/straw_man

What deceptive people are doing when they change the subject away from
E correctly simulated by H to form a rebuttal.

Simulating Halt Decider Applied to the Halting Theorem
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364657019_Simulating_Halt_Decider_Applied_to_the_Halting_Theorem

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem

<Z7AGL.578661$MVg8.465116@fx12.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10627&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10627

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy comp.software-eng sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx12.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.2
Subject: Re: Understanding how simulating halt deciders defeat the halting
theorem
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.software-eng,sci.logic
References: <tsea9u$28brs$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <tsea9u$28brs$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <Z7AGL.578661$MVg8.465116@fx12.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:57:45 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 2847
 by: Richard Damon - Mon, 13 Feb 2023 23:57 UTC

On 2/13/23 4:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> void E(int (*x)())
> {
>   HH(x, x);
>   return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   HH(E,E);
> }
>
> HH only needs to simulate E until HH correctly detects that E has a
> repeating state such that E correctly simulated by HH cannot possibly
> reach its own final state and terminate normally in any finite number of
> steps.
>
> Because it is an easily verified fact that
> E correctly simulated by HH
> cannot possibly halt (reach its own "return" instruction and terminate
> normally)
>
> HH is necessarily correct to abort its simulation of E and reject
> E correctly simulated by HH
>
> as non-halting as soon as it detects the repeating state in
> E correctly simulated by HH
>
> The repeating state that we and HH can both see is that
> E correctly simulated by HH
> would continue to call HH(E,E) in recursive simulation
>
> Making it impossible for
> E correctly simulated by H
> to reach its own "return" instruction and terminate normally (AKA halt).
>
> straw man
> An intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is
> easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
> https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/straw_man
>
> What deceptive people are doing when they change the subject away from
> E correctly simulated by H to form a rebuttal.
>
> Simulating Halt Decider Applied to the Halting Theorem
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364657019_Simulating_Halt_Decider_Applied_to_the_Halting_Theorem
>
>

Nope.

I replied to you ranting, you have ignored my statements because you
have NO answer to it, so you are admitting you are a failure and are
using flawed logic.

YOU ARE ADMITTING FAILURE BY NOT RESPONDING TO THE REBUTAL.

You are just proving that you are a ignorant pathological lying idiot.

Your arguement is base on simple lies that are based on assuming the
impossible happens.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor