Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
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 10:00:26 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <1007jub$3qb7l$5@dont-email.me>
References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me>
 <FAsVP.790302$BFJ.344089@fx13.ams4> <1005la7$3akrk$3@dont-email.me>
 <1006nrh$3l52k$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 17:00:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a793c50ac46b1404361ae4f1062ef558";
	logging-data="4009205"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Ui0oigK/xTYdp/bWH1eNq"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1FhPHorHdHm6vwbLuDoZ/JIfEcM=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <1006nrh$3l52k$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250516-4, 5/16/2025), Outbound message

On 5/16/2025 2:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2025-05-15 21:11:35 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> 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:
> 
> A partial simulation is possible. But at some point HHH discontinues the 
> simulation and returns a guessed answer.
> 

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}

int main()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}

HHH simulates DDD
the simulated DDD calls HHH(DDD)

HHH simulates DDD
the simulated DDD calls HHH(DDD)

HHH simulates DDD
the simulated DDD calls HHH(DDD)

HHH simulates DDD
the simulated DDD calls HHH(DDD)

HHH simulates DDD
the simulated DDD calls HHH(DDD)

How many more times before the fact that
DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot
possibly reach its "return" statement?

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer