Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: D simulated by H never halts no matter what H does
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 19:02:18 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <v0hfab$3vjo8$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uvq0sg$21m7a$1@dont-email.me> <uvq359$1doq3$4@i2pn2.org>
 <uvrbvs$2acf7$1@dont-email.me> <uvs70t$1h01f$1@i2pn2.org>
 <uvsgcl$2i80k$1@dont-email.me> <uvsj4v$1h01e$1@i2pn2.org>
 <uvubo2$34nh3$1@dont-email.me> <uvvsap$3i5q8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v00mf6$3nu0r$1@dont-email.me> <v02gu5$6quf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v038om$bitp$2@dont-email.me> <v05b0k$sivu$1@dont-email.me>
 <v05r5e$vvml$2@dont-email.me> <v05vl4$1165d$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0679k$12sq2$1@dont-email.me> <v07r2j$1h57l$1@dont-email.me>
 <v08gn4$1lpta$2@dont-email.me> <v0ag7u$27jkb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0b8np$2d4ja$1@dont-email.me> <v0c317$2538n$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0c7fn$2k0tc$1@dont-email.me> <v0d3h1$2t938$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0doho$31mkn$2@dont-email.me> <v0forg$3j1dk$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0ghhm$3oudg$2@dont-email.me> <v0gk5q$2a19r$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v0gmrt$3qd6i$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 02:02:19 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="94abfe76188a905a3abc96eb60b79e1c";
	logging-data="4181768"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19d7/18v9T34NY9us97uL/O"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ONc5g+EzjianM+gmBs7C9ge2odw=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v0gmrt$3qd6i$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5407

On 4/26/2024 12:05 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/26/2024 11:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 11:34 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 4/26/2024 3:32 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-04-25 14:15:20 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>> 02 {
>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>> 07 }
>>>>> 08
>>>>> 09 void main()
>>>>> 10 {
>>>>> 11   D(D);
>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>
>>>>> That H(D,D) must report on the behavior of its caller is the
>>>>> one that is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> What H(D,D) must report is independet of what procedure (if any)
>>>> calls it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thus when H(D,D) correctly reports that its input D(D) cannot possibly
>>> reach its own line 6 and halt no matter what H does then H can abort its
>>> input and report that its input D(D) does not halt.
>>
>> But since the program D(D) DOES reach its own line 6 when run, because 
>> H aborts its simulation and return 0 (since that is what you say this 
>> H will do), your statement is PROVEN TO BE A LIE, and you "logic" just 
>> a collection of contradictions.
>>
> 
> D simulated by H cannot possibly reach its own line 06 thus when we do
> not use the strawman deception to refer to a different D then we know
> that D simulated by H never halts.
> 
>>>
>>> The fact that the D(D) executed in main does halt is none of H's
>>> business because H is not allowed to report on the behavior of its
>>> caller.
>>>
>>
>> In other words, H doesn't need to report on the Behavior of the 
>> Program described by its input because it isn't actually a Halt 
>> Decider, because you are just a LIAR.
>>
>>
> 
> Anyone knowing the theory of computation knows that H is not allowed to
> report on the behavior of its caller.
> 
> In computability theory and computational complexity theory, an
> undecidable problem is a decision problem for which it is proved to be
> impossible to construct an algorithm that always leads to a correct yes-
> or-no answer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undecidable_problem
> 
> The behavior of the simulated D(D) before H aborts its simulation is
> different than the behavior of the executed D(D) after H has aborted
> its simulation.
> 
> Every time that a simulated input would never stop running unless
> aborted the simulating termination analyzer must abort this simulation
> to prevent its own infinite execution.
> 
> H(D,D) is a case of this H1(D,D) is not a case of this even though
> the only difference between H and H1 is that D calls H and D does
> not call H1.
> 
> D simulated by H would never stop running unless aborted and cannot
> possibly reach its own line 06 and halt no matter what H does.
> 
> Thus whenever we do not use the strawman deception to refer to a
> different D we know that D simulated by H specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations to H.
> 

*This might be a more succinct way of summing that up*
When you understand that D simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its 
own line 03 (thus cannot possibly halt) no matter what H does and

you understand that it is incorrect for H to report on the behavior of 
its caller: void main() { D(D); } then this necessitates

H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D specifies a 
non-halting sequence of configurations.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer