Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- finite string transformation rules

Am Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:32:28 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 6/13/2024 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/12/24 11:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/12/2024 10:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/12/24 11:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/12/2024 9:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/12/24 10:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 9:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/12/24 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 8:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/24 9:19 PM, olcott wrote:

>>>> You admitted that it didn't produce the "Correct Simulation" output
>>>> that it was supposed to produce.
>>> It was never supposed to produce this.
Gold.

>> But acting as a "pure simulator until ..." is NOT the same as acting as
>> a pure simulator.
>> And thus the "transform" is invalid, as shown by the fact that P(P)
>> halts even though H(P,P) uses its logic to say that it doesn't.
>> Thus, your "logic" introduces a FALSE premise into its logic, and thus
>> its conclusion is INVALID.
Nice.

>>>>> Tell me in your own words what you think COMPUTE THE MAPPING FROM
>>>>> INPUTS means.
>>>> It takes the input, and TRIES to process them to the answer
>>>> corresponding to the mapping it is supposed to be computing.

>>>> But to be a decider for a specific function, it needs to compute the
>>>> mapping that matches that function. So, A Halt Decider, to be a HALT
>>>> decider, needs to generate the exact same mapping as the Halting
>>>> mathematical function, which is defined in terms of the behavior of
>>>> the machine represented by the input.

>>>> Your H computes *A* mapping, but not the Halting Function mapping.
>>>> And the exact details of that mapping is a function of the decider
>>>> you create to try to compute it, as H and H1 generate different
>>>> answers for the D built on H (and for the D1 built on H1). Thus your
>>>> "POOP" mapping is different for each H you want to ask about, so in
>>>> one sense, isn't even a correct question to be asking.
>>>>
>>>> It isn't asking about the decider deciding on the behavior of the
>>>> input correctly simulated by itself, but the decider needing to
>>>> decide on the behavior of the input correctly simulated by a
>>>> particular H that was choosen.
>>>>
>>> Try and show the steps of the mapping that you expect in terms of D
>>> correctly simulated by H, line by line.
Exactly the steps D would take.

>> Since you call H a "Halt Decider", its criterion is, and can only be,
>> the behavior of the directly executed D(D),
> It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of how H computes the
> mapping from the x86 machine language finite string input to H(D,D)
> using the finite string transformation rules specified by the semantics
> of the x86 programming language that reaches the behavior of the
> directly executed D(D)
Do you know about UTMs?

> When I ask anyone to show the detailed steps of the mapping from the
> machine language finite string of D to the behavior of D(D) 
You're smart enough to reason about the behaviour of D from its 
description yourself.

-- 
joes