Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!fu-berlin.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H +++ Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 22:36:27 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 79 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 05:36:28 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1fe47412d5222aa086f42d5af46fe483"; logging-data="3208757"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+/VrUYCiQWky0dIgRZsQdW" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:LNzJ8dOhQc1cAdyC4iPDXwMmdE0= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3900 On 5/6/2024 10:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/6/24 11:00 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 5/6/2024 8:39 PM, immibis wrote: >>> On 5/05/24 21:40, olcott wrote: >>>> If you are claiming that you have some top secret proof that shows >>>> the above execution trace is incorrect I am taking this as the empty >>>> claims of evidence of election fraud that no one has ever seen. >>> >>> The simulated execution trace is proven incorrect because it is >>> different from the actual execution trace. >>> >>> This is not top secret - it is very obvious. >>> >> >> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function >> 01 int D(ptr x) >> 02 { >> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x); >> 04   if (Halt_Status) >> 05     HERE: goto HERE; >> 06   return Halt_Status; >> 07 } >> 08 >> 09 int main() >> 10 { >> 11   H(D,D); >> 12 } >> >> Every H/D pair in the universe where D(D) is simulated by the >> same H(D,D) that D(D) calls: AS IN THE ABOVE TEMPLATE >> Involves 1 to ∞ steps of D and also includes zero to ∞ >> recursive simulations where H simulates itself simulating D(D). >> >> None of these simulated inputs can possibly reach past their >> own line 03, thus none of them teach their own line 06 and halt. >> >> Once you accept the software engineering of this we can get >> into the much more difficult computer science of this. >> >> If you cannot understand the software engineering of this >> then there is no sense moving on to something more difficult. >> > > Except I have described how to design a set of machines H that can > simulate this input to the finis input to the final line 06. > > Thus, your claim is FALSE. > When you interpret On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote: *Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly* *stop running unless aborted by H* as *D NEVER simulated by H* you have shown a reckless disregard for the truth that would win a defamation case. > The fact that you keep on repeating it after it has been shown to you > just shows that you are nothing but a pathological liar. > > Refute that claim or STFU. > > If you are sure I haven't made that proof, take the challenge, and if I > show you where I posted the proof, and you can not show where it doesn't > meet these stated requirements, then you agree to drop this idiotic plan > to try to "prove" that Halting is decidable. > > If you aren't sure I haven't made the proof, then you are just admitting > you are a liar for making the claim that it must be true. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer