Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #86877

Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:04:17 -0500
olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/12/2022 12:52 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 12:38:31 -0500
> > olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 10/12/2022 12:24 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 10:08:20 -0500
> >>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>> Professor Michael Sipser of MIT said that this verbatim paragraph
> >>>> looks correct:
> >>>>
> >>>>       If H does correctly determine that its correct simulation
> >>>>       of D would never stop running unless aborted, would it be
> >>>>       correct for H to abort this simulation and report that D
> >>>>       specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations?
> >>>>
> >>>> This validates the idea of a simulating halt decider referenced
> >>>> in this paper.
> >>>>
> >>>> *Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof*
> >>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364302709_Rebutting_the_Sipser_Halting_Problem_Proof
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Professor Sipser has not had the time to carefully review this
> >>>> paper presented to him.
> >>>>
> >>>> *The exact words posted above have been approved by Michael
> >>>> Sipser*  
> >>>
> >>> Whilst the paragraph you sent to Sipser is correct the crucial
> >>> detail that you are glossing over is that you do NOT perform a
> >>> correct simulation for all inputs:
> >>>      
> >>
> >> Complete halt deciding system (Visual Studio Project) Sipser
> >> version. (a) x86utm operating system
> >> (b) x86 emulator adapted from libx86emu to compile under Windows
> >> (c) Several halt deciders and their sample inputs contained within
> >> Halt7.c https://liarparadox.org/2022_10_08.zip
> >>
> >> Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill can easily verify
> >> that Sipser_D is correctly simulated by Sipser_H and that Sipser_D
> >> remains stuck in infinitely recursive simulation unless and until
> >> Sipser_H aborts its correct simulation of Sipser_D.  
> > 
> > You chose to not fully address my reply by snipping the important
> > part so I will give you another chance:
> > 
> > Whilst the paragraph you sent to Sipser is correct the crucial
> > detail that you are glossing over is that you do NOT perform a
> > correct simulation for all inputs:
> > 
> > void Px(void (*x)())
> > {
> > 	(void) H(x, x);
> > 	return;
> > }
> > 
> > The correct simulation of Px above is to simulate Px halting.
> >   
> 
> Not at all. It must be a correct simulation of the actual input by
> the simulating halt decider.
> 
> int main() { H(Px,Px); }
> (a) The executed H simulates Px that calls a simulated H
> (b) that simulates Px that calls a simulated H
> (c) that simulates Px that calls a simulated H ...

Yes indeed it must be a correct simulation and a correct simulation of
Px is to simulate Px halting.

/Flibble

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 10:08 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 11:48 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 12:04 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 18:24 +0100
    Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-12 12:38 -0500
      Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 18:52 +0100
        Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 13:04 -0500
          Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 19:07 +0100
            Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 13:25 -0500
              Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 19:30 +0100
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 14:17 -0500
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 20:26 +0100
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 14:32 -0500
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 20:50 +0100
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider (Ben's support) olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-20 22:17 -0500
  Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-21 15:03 -0500
    Re: Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2022-10-22 05:19 -0700
      Re: Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria [Paul N Lies] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-22 14:20 -0500
      Paul N is a liar or does not bother to pay attention olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-22 17:10 -0500

csiph-web