Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating
 itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:38:28 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <39426a4d13101b96c08d905495868385709db185@i2pn2.org>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me>
 <286747edde7812d05b1bdf4f59af1cffdd44e95a@i2pn2.org>
 <vhdktc$qirt$1@dont-email.me>
 <e3fe85b499b799f440d722c0433bab69edf2e289@i2pn2.org>
 <vhe661$tuln$1@dont-email.me>
 <cbd95d14a4b405724f145aa6144898bdfd3975ce@i2pn2.org>
 <vhe95v$ue1m$1@dont-email.me>
 <779e20cb36e226d2d3515fb62c5c8fa7b8e22d05@i2pn2.org>
 <vhfgks$18unc$1@dont-email.me>
 <f1c860093e9a1b497d3c335625330cd13936a054@i2pn2.org>
 <vhg1il$1cfbe$1@dont-email.me>
 <4588f439c2cf659f139ac382988bee502f6374cb@i2pn2.org>
 <vhg3vm$1csnf$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 19:38:28 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3087137"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vhg3vm$1csnf$2@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 4905
Lines: 81

On 11/18/24 2:19 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/18/2024 1:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/18/24 1:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/18/2024 8:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 11/18/24 8:49 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 11/18/2024 3:19 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Sun, 17 Nov 2024 20:35:43 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 8:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 8:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 4:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 3:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/2024 1:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/17/24 1:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I referred to every element of an infinite set of encodings 
>>>>>>>>>>> of HHH.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean they are parameterised by the number of steps they 
>>>>>> simulate?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No I do not mean that.
>>>>
>>>> Then your arguement is based on an equivocation.
>>>>
>>>>> Whether or not DDD emulated by HHH ever reaches its
>>>>> own "return" instruction final halt state has nothing
>>>>> to do with any of the internal working of HHH as long
>>>>> as each HHH emulates N steps of its input according
>>>>> to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>>
>>>> Except that the behavior DOES depend on if that HHH returns.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, your subjective, non-semantic property of "emulated by 
>>>> HHH" is just a meaningless term, so doesn't really mean anything, so 
>>>> your statement is just nonsense anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are a damned liar trying to get away with lying about
>>> the effect of the pathological relationship that DDD specifies.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nope, you are a just a damned liar making claims without any form of 
>> actual logic behind them.
>>
>> Do you have ANY source that backs your claims about what you claim?
>>
> 
> DEFECTION FOR BRAINS
> DDD emulated by HHH specifies that HHH emulates
> itself emulating DDD such that no such DDD can ever
> reach its "return" instruction final halt state.
> 
> *Professor Hehner recognized this repeating process before I did*
>    From a programmer's point of view, if we apply an interpreter to a
>    program text that includes a call to that same interpreter with that
>    same text as argument, then we have an infinite loop. A halting
>    program has some of the same character as an interpreter: it applies
>    to texts through abstract interpretation. Unsurprisingly, if we apply
>    a halting program to a program text that includes a call to that same
>    halting program with that same text as argument, then we have an
>    infinite loop. (Hehner:2011:15)
> 
> [5] E C R Hehner. Problems with the Halting Problem, COMPUTING2011 
> Symposium on 75 years of Turing Machine and Lambda-Calculus, Karlsruhe 
> Germany, invited, 2011 October 20-21; Advances in Computer Science and 
> Engineering v.10 n.1 p.31-60, 2013
> https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/PHP.pdf
> 

Note, HHH is not a "interpreter" tasked with recreating the behavior of 
the input.

Thus, the arguement does not hold.

If HHH aborts, then the CORRECT interpreation of the input is 
non-halting, as DDD calls HHH which will return to DDD and thus DDD Halts.


HHH is just an incorrect decider, because it wasn't smart enough to 
handle this non-pathological case.