Path: ...!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: Sat, 17 May 2025 12:30:11 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <1009kv3$at58$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> <1006o7k$3l6rb$1@dont-email.me> <1007k36$3qb7l$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 11:30:11 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fec6e91447213fbda2725682e460eb49";
	logging-data="357544"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18PJPg3A4Fh6Wpu2w6ZAUfY"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dvp6AinRhSoO8h48P6W408A10yY=
Bytes: 3282

On 2025-05-16 15:03:02 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/16/2025 2:07 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-05-15 21:35:24 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> Simulation is not a multi-tasking problem so knowledge of multi-tasking
>> operating systems is not relevant.
> 
> The simulation of one function in the same program
> by another function in the same program does
> require cooperative multi-tasking switching from
> the simulator to the simulated and back.

No, it does not. Simulators I have made never use multitasking.

-- 
Mikko