Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Simulating halt deciders (SHDs) simply do not work; alas neither does Olcott.
9 views
Skip to first unread message
Mr Flibble
Oct 23, 2022, 10:59:34 AM10/23/22
to
Hi!
Simulating halt deciders (SHDs) simply do not work.
Why? A turing machine should be able to implement ANY algorithm and as
such it is an idealisation, an INFINITE STATE MACHINE (ISM) if you will.
A simulating halt decider (SHD) can only over be implemented as a FINITE
STATE MACHINE (FSM) so is not suitable for a) solving the halting
problem or b) refuting the halting problem proofs.
Olcott has wasted the last 18 years of his life with what he thinks he
invented (SHDs). Alas the deluded dear hasn't even invented a halt
decider, all he has invented is a particularly useless form of
simulation detector.
/Flibble
Simulating halt deciders (SHDs) simply do not work.
Why? A turing machine should be able to implement ANY algorithm and as
such it is an idealisation, an INFINITE STATE MACHINE (ISM) if you will.
A simulating halt decider (SHD) can only over be implemented as a FINITE
STATE MACHINE (FSM) so is not suitable for a) solving the halting
problem or b) refuting the halting problem proofs.
Olcott has wasted the last 18 years of his life with what he thinks he
invented (SHDs). Alas the deluded dear hasn't even invented a halt
decider, all he has invented is a particularly useless form of
simulation detector.
/Flibble
Mr Flibble
Oct 23, 2022, 11:19:11 AM10/23/22
to
On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 10:12:47 -0500
olcott <polc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Please do not post to comp.lang.c or you will kill it*
> discrete cells,[5] each of which can hold a single symbol drawn from
> a finite set of symbols called the alphabet of the machine. It has a
> "head" that, at any point in the machine's operation, is positioned
> over one of these cells, and a "state" selected from a *finite set of
> states*. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine
Nope. I am including the tape as part of the machine's state just as we
include machine memory as being part of an SHD's state.
/Flibble
olcott <polc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Please do not post to comp.lang.c or you will kill it*
>
> On 10/23/2022 9:59 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Simulating halt deciders (SHDs) simply do not work.
> >
> > Why? A turing machine should be able to implement ANY algorithm and
> > as such it is an idealisation, an INFINITE STATE MACHINE (ISM) if
> > you will.
>
> The machine operates on an infinite[4] memory tape divided into
> On 10/23/2022 9:59 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Simulating halt deciders (SHDs) simply do not work.
> >
> > Why? A turing machine should be able to implement ANY algorithm and
> > as such it is an idealisation, an INFINITE STATE MACHINE (ISM) if
> > you will.
>
> discrete cells,[5] each of which can hold a single symbol drawn from
> a finite set of symbols called the alphabet of the machine. It has a
> "head" that, at any point in the machine's operation, is positioned
> over one of these cells, and a "state" selected from a *finite set of
> states*. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine
Nope. I am including the tape as part of the machine's state just as we
include machine memory as being part of an SHD's state.
/Flibble
0 new messages