Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem
 Proof
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 10:48:36 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 111
Message-ID: <105nj94$36e8e$2@dont-email.me>
References: <105ht1n$36s20$1@dont-email.me>
 <eed26ffea811a639a76d0184321c57eafba746cd@i2pn2.org>
 <pI4fQ.147044$gKRf.71824@fx12.ams4> <105kvub$2q17h$1@dont-email.me>
 <105lg9k$3v8t8$6@dont-email.me> <105ljhk$9si$1@news.muc.de>
 <105lkj4$3v8t8$13@dont-email.me> <105lnn2$2srt$1@news.muc.de>
 <105lpsd$1mvr$1@dont-email.me> <105m9me$2phf$1@news.muc.de>
 <105mcl3$48m9$1@dont-email.me> <105ms6j$333bs$1@dont-email.me>
 <105n1ie$bbj9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:48:37 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="93c4df84a66726d55c0578f53e43d7fe";
	logging-data="3356942"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/nA9dzXFQD62S/kOD+Xgil"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:acRJOZz2JBvCCoeW2PloG+xD9pI=
In-Reply-To: <105n1ie$bbj9$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: nl, en-GB

Op 22.jul.2025 om 05:46 schreef olcott:
> On 7/21/2025 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 7/21/25 5:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/21/2025 3:58 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>>>
>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 7/21/2025 10:52 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/21/2025 9:40 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/21/2025 4:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-07-20 11:48:37 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:13:43 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ .... ]
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Your problem is you don't understand the meaning of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> words you are
>>>>>>>>>>>> using.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is an ad hominem attack, not argumentation.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is also honest and truthful, which is not as common as it 
>>>>>>>>>> should.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is also honest and truthful that people
>>>>>>>>> that deny verified facts are either liars
>>>>>>>>> or lack sufficient technical competence.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> What you call "verified facts" are generally nothing of the 
>>>>>>>> kind. They
>>>>>>>> are merely things, often false, you would like to be true.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> *One key example of a denied verified fact is when Joes said*
>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/18/2025 3:49 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> very obvious that HHH cannot simulate
>>>>>>>> DDD past the call to HHH.
>>>>
>>>>>> Joes is quite right, here, as has been said to you many times over by
>>>>>> several people.
>>>>
>>>>>>> HHH(DDD) does emulate itself emulating DDD
>>>>
>>>>>> You will have a get out clause from the vagueness of your 
>>>>>> language, which
>>>>>> could be construed to mean practically anything.
>>>>
>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>
>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>> {
>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>    return;
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>> Not at all. HHH does emulate the x86 machine code
>>>>> of DDD pointed to by P. That is does this according
>>>>> to the semantics of the x86 language conclusively
>>>>> proves that this emulation is correct.
>>>>
>>>> That's nauseatingly overstretching things into another lie.  
>>>> Whatever HHH
>>>> might do is far short of sufficient "conclusively to prove" that the
>>>> emulation is correct.  To prove that is likely impossible in principle,
>>>> that's even assuming you could define "correct" coherently.
>>>>
>>>
>>> [00002192] 55             push ebp
>>> [00002193] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
>>> [00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192
>>> [0000219a] e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH
>>> [0000219f] 83c404         add esp,+04
>>> [000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
>>> [000021a3] c3             ret
>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>>
>> Which isn't a program, you need to include the code for HHH.
>>
> 

As usual irrelevant claims without evidence:

> *Yet again your attention deficit disorder*
> I have told you countless times that all of
> the machine code for every function is in
> the same global memory space of halt7.obj.

So, why don't you include it in the input? Suggesting that those 18 
bytes are the input is misleading.

> 
> I have also told you countless times that HHH
> does simulate itself simulating DDD and I
> have proven this by this execution trace.

But the trace shows that it does not simulate itself up to the end, even 
though you claim that HHH returns, so there must be an end.