Path: 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: Mon, 19 May 2025 12:54:41 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <100ev51$1ibpt$1@dont-email.me>
References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me> <bc6f0f045212bdfb7f7d883426873a09e37789ea@i2pn2.org> <1005u6v$3cpt2$1@dont-email.me> <1005v0p$3b07v$1@dont-email.me> <10063u0$3dmiv$1@dont-email.me> <1006on8$3l9t7$1@dont-email.me> <1007kgq$3qb7l$9@dont-email.me> <1009lm9$b15q$1@dont-email.me> <100ceum$uvq0$1@dont-email.me> <87ecwl1s2p.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <100dscu$18b5s$1@dont-email.me> <87v7pxzbp4.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <100du9m$18m8u$1@dont-email.me> <100dvuj$18b5q$2@dont-email.me> <100e17m$194d7$1@dont-email.me> <100e3qo$1d7a1$1@dont-email.me> <100e5g1$1do0r$1@dont-email.me> <100e7qg$1e5fs$1@dont-email.me> <100e9ns$1ee1a$1@dont-email.me> <100eb2m$1ejgp$1@dont-email.me> <100ebsj$1eo7p$1@dont-email.me> <100edn6$1eu82$1@dont-email.me> <100effa$1euvr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 11:54:42 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8f4381c44869abbb66b062db77a9c084";
	logging-data="1650493"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Tusz2ZEWx+SOscISLomx4"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9BzC3jEw2BZcWUrW72ST1ca1vXE=

On 2025-05-19 05:27:05 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/18/2025 11:57 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 19/05/2025 05:25, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/18/2025 11:12 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 19/05/2025 04:49, olcott wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> ...a load of nonsense that didn't address my reply at all. I won't 
>>>> rebut it point by point because I have already dealt with all of his 
>>>> remarks, some of them several times over.
>>>> 
>>>> < SNIP! >
>>>> 
>>>> I'm beginning to wonder whether he ever learned to read for comprehension.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That you tried to get away with dodging my point
>> 
>> I'm not dodging your point. I'm simply not interested in debating your 
>> point when it is already being so expertly debated by Mike Terry and
> 
> Mike Terry's recent post
> 
> On 5/14/2025 7:36 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> https://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3C1003cu5%242p3g1%241%40dont-email.me%3E 
> 
> 
> was succinct and correct and explained
> all of the details of how a simulating halt decider could be
> derived from these words:
> 
> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
>      input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
>      would never stop running unless aborted then
> 
>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

And says nothing about what every C programmer does or doesn't know.

-- 
Mikko