Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: The essence of my halting problem work
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 06:56:37 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <113a7e9624db51cd6c1dcf434b59d27bcb322cc9@i2pn2.org>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me>
 <39d1fae0d0e03ceb82a6a7c722581d5e84d4998f@i2pn2.org>
 <via9kk$kpf2$1@dont-email.me>
 <6f73ca664f7017ea34651a485a4bd3602e9cbe57@i2pn2.org>
 <vilrih$3n2q7$2@dont-email.me>
 <b961b7e79a85fcb3bbd058930fef41e582f7acdd@i2pn2.org>
 <vio31i$dg23$1@dont-email.me>
 <4ccc2cbecfd0e6befd031ed394f1262edd021822@i2pn2.org>
 <viposd$u16a$1@dont-email.me>
 <dd3385b7f379281e5d476701f96e30538ea85802@i2pn2.org>
 <viqua6$16uvh$1@dont-email.me>
 <3d80e95768bf6260168865530aaad3591aa03fda@i2pn2.org>
 <vir0c7$17d36$1@dont-email.me>
 <6d0683c816f5f63b3a17c8a52e9b691eecc143a8@i2pn2.org>
 <vir0sq$17ga3$1@dont-email.me>
 <2ebbdef8e9070397a2ec3db6dbc37c16f1fe8923@i2pn2.org>
 <vir9n1$1cqu9$1@dont-email.me> <vj3tv4$3oe44$1@dont-email.me>
 <vj4sbs$3vc6g$1@dont-email.me> <vj6i9q$cdar$1@dont-email.me>
 <vj6sb8$e4cs$1@dont-email.me> <vj8r0r$s8mo$1@dont-email.me>
 <vj9irp$109o5$1@dont-email.me>
 <563f6f641ba78d2cc609ca8f2a9f9e2807294c5f@i2pn2.org>
 <vjb5pp$1d0qu$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:56:38 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2336406"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vjb5pp$1d0qu$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 11841
Lines: 254

On 12/10/24 11:52 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/10/2024 8:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 12/10/24 9:22 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/10/2024 1:35 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-12-09 13:46:16 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/9/2024 4:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-12-08 19:34:19 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/8/2024 4:55 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-05 04:20:50 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is an 80% chance that I will be alive in one month.
>>>>>>>>> There may be an extended pause in my comments.
>>>>>>>>> I will try to bring a computer to the out of town hospital.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/2024 8:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/24 8:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/2024 7:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/24 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/2024 7:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/24 8:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/2024 6:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/4/24 9:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/3/2024 5:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/3/24 6:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/3/2024 3:03 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 02 Dec 2024 20:48:49 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/28/2024 1:48 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   >>> HHH can't simulate itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is WRONG !!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH DOES EMULATE ITSELF PROVING THAT IT CAN EMULATE 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ITSELF.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We know that HHH halts. It doesn't simulate itself 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please try and explain how you are not dishonest what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try to change the subject from my rebuttal of your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> statement:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>> HHH can't simulate itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That HHH does emulate itself emulating DDD proves
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT IT CAN DO THIS.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But only if your think that wrong answer can be right.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not mention anything about answers my entire
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scope is that HHH does emulate itself emulating DDD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thus conclusively proving that HHH can emulated itself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulating DDD.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whenever you go out-of-scope like this it surely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems dishonest to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But the behaivor that HHH shows that it has *IS* an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "answer",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the x86 language cannot possibly reach its "ret" instruction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether HHH aborts this emulation after N steps or never 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aborts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just a nonsense sentence, since HHH can't emulate HHH as 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it isn't given it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you have to keep fucking lying about this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I could die on the operating table in two weeks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What's the lie?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you point to what I say that is wrong, and a reliable 
>>>>>>>>>>>> reference that show it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All you have is your own lies to call it a lie.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And yes, you might die in two weeks, and the only thing you 
>>>>>>>>>>>> will have left behind is all your lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes you fucking jackass this conclusively proves that
>>>>>>>>>>> HHH does emulate itself emulating DDD.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It proves that your HHH fails to meet its requirement to be 
>>>>>>>>>> pure function
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It proves that HHH does emulate itself emulating DDD.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once we get through this point then we know that DDD
>>>>>>>>> does not halt:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics of
>>>>>>>>> the x86 language cannot possibly reach its "ret" instruction
>>>>>>>>> whether HHH aborts this emulation after N steps or never aborts.
>>>>>>>>> *This tells us that DDD emulated by HHH DOES NOT HALT*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We do not begin to examine whether or not HHH found this
>>>>>>>>> answer as a pure function until after we agree with the
>>>>>>>>> prior point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *In all of the history of the halting problem there*
>>>>>>>>> *have never been a correct return value for this*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is not a useful main. It is sufficient to determine whether 
>>>>>>>> HHH
>>>>>>>> returns but not to determine whther it returns the correct value.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When we understand that the first point is correct
>>>>>>>>> then we know that HHH returning 0 is correct.
>>>>>>>>> *This has much has never ever been done before*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is one of the well known methods to prove that the value 
>>>>>>>> HHH returns
>>>>>>>> is incorrect. If HHH returns 0 then DD returns 0 but the meaning 
>>>>>>>> of 0 in
>>>>>>>> this context is that DD does not halt. THerefore the value 
>>>>>>>> returned by
>>>>>>>> HHH is incorrect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Every expert in the C programming language has agreed that DD
>>>>>>> simulated by HHH cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, they not. They have agreed that DD returns only if HHH returns
>>>>>> 0 and that HHH is not able to simulated DD to that point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everyone disagreeing with this has dishonestly used to strawman
>>>>>>> deception to refer to different behavior than DD simulated by HHH.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========