Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem Proof -- FL
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 10:52:52 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <1064lsk$2rkiu$1@dont-email.me>
References: <105ht1n$36s20$1@dont-email.me> <eed26ffea811a639a76d0184321c57eafba746cd@i2pn2.org> <pI4fQ.147044$gKRf.71824@fx12.ams4> <105obtn$hate$7@dont-email.me> <pXXfQ.4$mj1e.3@fx45.iad> <105pn1c$r41b$4@dont-email.me> <105q67b$8o3u$2@dont-email.me> <105qngv$v75u$6@dont-email.me> <upCgQ.4507$v9ff.905@fx42.iad> <w2MgQ.13226$eHx.5786@fx11.ams4> <106055n$138e1$3@dont-email.me> <r6PgQ.31052$4DJ8.2768@fx04.iad> <1060f0m$155c3$1@dont-email.me> <9JPgQ.150643$Tc12.40039@fx17.iad> <1060n64$168i0$1@dont-email.me> <4rRgQ.31617$PvV.21729@fx45.iad> <1060ppa$168i0$4@dont-email.me> <jESgQ.2351$AW.1322@fx02.iad> <1060u8t$172k3$2@dont-email.me> <uOTgQ.10822$2Md4.1120@fx48.iad> <10614pa$17qo4$1@dont-email.me> <M5WgQ.148313$lwk1.93928@fx15.iad> <1061b1c$189om$1@dont-email.me> <mM2hQ.171497$Tc12.82306@fx17.iad> <1062n58$1ecv8$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 09:52:52 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d7b4b3f0b7e120619cbdcba5ff2a6850";
	logging-data="3002974"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IQ0RkKikuNz8mGgYpXViW"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:49T0Xb3g5Ki8rgP5Pjezgcf22Lk=

On 2025-07-26 14:02:15 +0000, olcott said:

> On 7/26/2025 6:14 AM, Richard the Demon wrote:
>> On 7/25/25 9:29 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/25/2025 8:22 PM, Richard the Demon wrote:
>>>> On 7/25/25 7:42 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>
>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>> [00002192] 55         push ebp
>>>>> [00002193] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>> [00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192  // push DDD
>>>>> [0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2  // call HHH
>>>>> [0000219f] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>> [000021a2] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>> [000021a3] c3         ret
>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>>>>> 
>>>>> Until you provide the execution trace of DDD emulated
>>>>> by HHH (according to the rules of the x86 language)
>>>>> such that this emulated DDD reaches its own emulated
>>>>> "ret" instruction final halt state
>>>>> *you will be considered a fucking liar*
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That is just a lIE.
>>>> 
>>>> Until you realize that HHH just doesn't do a correct simulation,
>>> *You dishonestly changed the words that I said, as you always do*
>>> *Here are the words that I actually said*
>>> (according to the rules of the x86 language)
>>> 
>> 
>> Because your HHH ignores the last step of the last instruction it 
>> processes, that of execute the next instruction.
>> 
> 
> <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
> 
> _DDD()
> [00002192] 55         push ebp
> [00002193] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192  // push DDD
> [0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2  // call HHH
> [0000219f] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000021a2] 5d         pop ebp
> [000021a3] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
> 
> As soon as HHH emulates DDD then emulates itself
> emulating DDD and this DDD calls HHH(DDD) to do it
> again, HHH has matched a non-terminating behavior pattern.

That is false. The behavour of DDD is that it terminates.
Therefore no pattern it matches is a non-terminating pattern.

-- 
Mikko