Mike Terry <
news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> writes:
On 23/08/2024 22:07, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
joes <noreply@example.org> writes:
Am Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:55:52 -0500 schrieb olcott:
Professor Sipser clearly agreed that an H that does a finite simulation >>>> of D is to predict the behavior of an unlimited simulation of D.
If the simulator *itself* would not abort. The H called by D is,
by construction, the same and *does* abort.
We don't really know what context Sipser was given. I got in touch at
the time so do I know he had enough context to know that PO's ideas were
"wacky" and that had agreed to what he considered a "minor remark".
Since PO considers his words finely crafted and key to his so-called
work I think it's clear that Sipser did not take the "minor remark" he
agreed to to mean what PO takes it to mean! My own take if that he
(Sipser) read it as a general remark about how to determine some cases,
i.e. that D names an input that H can partially simulate to determine
it's halting or otherwise. We all know or could construct some such
cases.
Exactly my reading. It makes Sipser's agreement natural, because it is
both correct [with sensible interpretation of terms], and moreover
describes an obvious strategy that a partial decider might use that can decide halting for some specific cases. No need for Sipser to be deceptive or misleading here, when the truth suffices. (In particular no need to employ "tricksy" vacuous truth get out clauses just to get PO off his back
as some have suggested.)
Yes, and it fits with his thinking it a "trivial remark". Mind you I
can't help I feeling really annoyed that a respected academic is having
his name repeated dragged into this nonsense by PO.
That aside, it's such an odd way to present an argument: "I managed to
trick X into saying 'yes' to something vague". In any reasonable
collegiate exchange you'd go back and check: "So even when D is
constructed from H, H can return based on what /would/ happen if H did
not stop simulating so that H(D,D) == false is correct even though D(D) halts?". Just imagine what Sipser would say to that!
Academic exchange thrives on clarity. Cranks thrive on smoke and
mirrors.
--
Ben.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)