Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as
 non-halting V2
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 22:18:25 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <3ed19f56369f8931441685ed12f330833d946f14@i2pn2.org>
References: <v6rg65$32o1o$3@dont-email.me>
 <97e0632d0d889d141bdc6005ce6e513c53867798@i2pn2.org>
 <v6sdlu$382g0$1@dont-email.me> <v6td3a$3ge79$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6tp1j$3imib$2@dont-email.me> <v6trdu$3irhh$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6tu01$3imib$11@dont-email.me>
 <a177dd76613794d6bb877c65ffe6c587a8f31bc1@i2pn2.org>
 <v6tvpv$3imib$14@dont-email.me>
 <091e8b7baeea467ee894b1c79c8943cb9773adb7@i2pn2.org>
 <v6u346$3khl8$1@dont-email.me>
 <16ac79611a441e7e01119631051f69119eee958a@i2pn2.org>
 <v6v06i$3pivt$1@dont-email.me>
 <23cb2d2401b87bf4f6a604aa1a78b93ffc9a29bc@i2pn2.org>
 <v6v2t1$3pmjn$3@dont-email.me>
 <3fc6548531f91ed14a27420caf9679a634573ed0@i2pn2.org>
 <v70lmo$61d8$1@dont-email.me>
 <8a6e6d9ff49aabe2525ce5729a439c807de4768a@i2pn2.org>
 <34Ocnd4voeWlDAn7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v725d7$hlvg$1@dont-email.me>
 <aa7643b6d8c46d2c4dd5ef92ae3650afe114adbb@i2pn2.org>
 <v734ct$mjis$2@dont-email.me>
 <056325e336f81a50f4fb9e60f90934eaac823d22@i2pn2.org>
 <v73gk2$obtd$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 02:18:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3273011"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v73gk2$obtd$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3442
Lines: 36

On 7/15/24 11:52 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/15/2024 9:04 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 07:23:57 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 7/15/2024 3:59 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Sun, 14 Jul 2024 22:35:03 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 7/14/2024 10:02 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>
>>>>> Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination of
>>>>> simulating termination analyzer HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
>>>>> behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>>> It's just that the input HHH halts and does not need to be aborted.
>>> At the point that it is aborted it did need to be aborted
>> Because it hadn't halted yet? 
> 
> Because HHH has seen a repeating state that proves that DDD
> correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly ever stop running
> unless aborted.

No, HHH *THINKS* it has seen repeating state because is has the wrong 
model for the HHH that it chose not to emulate (and thus HHH fails to 
emulate correctly). It is a DIFFERENT DDD that is built on a DIFFERENT 
HHH whose correct semulation never stops, of DDD is just not a program 
at all and you whole system is just a LIE.

Remember, programs constain ALL their code, including everything they 
call, like HHH.

> 
> That you fail to understand a that there is a repeating state
> or fail to understand that a repeating state proves this is
> less than no rebuttal at all.
> 
>> Why should it have halted, it will do so
>> in the future. Do you place arbitrary lifetime limits on all programs?
>>
>