Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Overcoming the proof of undecidability of the Halting Problem by a simple example in C
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:09:00 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <1006oac$3l6s6$1@dont-email.me>
References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me> <FAsVP.790302$BFJ.344089@fx13.ams4> <1005la7$3akrk$3@dont-email.me> <tSsVP.790303$BFJ.255821@fx13.ams4> <1005mms$3akrk$4@dont-email.me> <rBtVP.134541$0ia.111399@fx11.ams4> <1005t5g$3chps$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 09:09:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1dfa167546830b8917680f44790d20f0";
	logging-data="3840902"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX195TFKSJ5K/7thw0jqgP648"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0GdVMpDyayQKETh7xAeUUCxHKi4=
Bytes: 3290

On 2025-05-15 23:25:36 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/15/2025 5:08 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 16:35:24 -0500, olcott wrote:
>> 
>>> On 5/15/2025 4:18 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 16:11:35 -0500, olcott wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 5/15/2025 3:59 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 15:47:16 -0500, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I overcome the proof of undecidability of the Halting Problem in
>>>>>>> that the code that "does the opposite of whatever value that HHH
>>>>>>> returns" becomes unreachable to DD correctly simulated by HHH.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to simulate itself again over
>>>>>>> and over until HHH sees this repeating pattern and aborts or both
>>>>>>> HHH and DD crash due to OOM error.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is not possible for HHH to simulate DD because we are already
>>>>>> inside DD when we call HHH:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Since HHH does correctly simulate itself simulating DD we have
>>>>> complete proof that you are wrong.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I had to write the whole x86utm operating system to make this work.
>>>> 
>>>> It is not possible to make this work even by "writing an operating
>>>> system"
>>>> so whatever you think you are doing it isn't addressing my core point:
>>>> you are NOT *fully* simulating DD by HHH because you are already inside
>>>> DD when you are calling HHH.
>>>> 
>>>> /Flibble
>>> 
>>> Anyone that is intimately familiar with how multi-tasking operating
>>> systems work will understand how HHH could emulate itself emulating its
>>> input.
>> 
>> What has multi-tasking got to do with it?  You are talking out of your
>> arse, Peter. :)
> 
> Anyone that is intimately familiar with multi-tasking
> operating systems will know the details of how HHH
> emulates itself emulating DDD.

That is an implementation detail that is not required by the problem.

-- 
Mikko