Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see... predict correctly Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 18:50:57 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 52 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:50:58 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d6c56e3cc0e766a5f243fbbf3db0d44a"; logging-data="1322228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19KMHJLHrcJDgyWYykU6Yut" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:7Yz7+kUOXT6yvlwLFXXZsNQ15VE= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3481 On 7/30/2024 6:45 PM, Mad Hamish wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 16:13:55 -0500, olcott > wrote: > >> On 7/30/2024 4:07 PM, joes wrote: >>> Am Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:05:54 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 7/30/2024 1:48 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 30.jul.2024 om 17:14 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 7/30/2024 9:51 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 30.jul.2024 om 16:21 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> On 7/30/2024 1:52 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-29 14:07:53 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) show the same non-halting >>>>>>>>>> behavior pattern in their derived execution traces of their >>>>>>>>>> inputs. >>>>>>>>> Hard to believe as their behaviour is so different and you don't >>>>>>>>> say what pattern the see. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Its all in the part that you erased* >>> >>>>>>> We all see the differences between these two. >>>>>> >>>>>> They both correctly predict behavior that must be aborted to prevent >>>>>> the infinite execution of the simulating halt decider. >>>>>> >>>>> Except that the prediction for the second one is wrong. The simulation >>>>> of an aborting and halting function, like HHH, does not need to be >>>>> aborted. >>>> I proved otherwise. When the abort code is commented out then it keeps >>>> repeating again and again, thus conclusively proving that is must be >>>> aborted or HHH never halts. >>> But the abort is not commented out in the running code! >>> >> >> I modified the original code by commenting out >> the abort and it does endlessly repeat just like >> HHH correctly predicted. > > Which means that it works in some cases, not all cases > Which means it doesn't work universally > > So it's not a general solution to the halting problem It is not supposed to be a general solution to the halting problem. it only shows how the "impossible" input is correctly determined to be non halting. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer