Path: ...!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
Subject: Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting
 problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 19:21:57 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <467efee4c6b2f6a4c03ff1ae3d5cea7a44de80ec@i2pn2.org>
References: <f4f759fcc2f0b701a91e38062c25d16534e470af@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>
 <visnat$1o5le$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <vj0amr$2mpd0$1@dont-email.me>
 <5e1d34cbe07b0dbffe60a12121f2f751b308c1c5@i2pn2.org>
 <vj0d0q$2n835$2@dont-email.me> <vj0glp$2ruve$1@dont-email.me>
 <vj1bno$31ulr$1@dont-email.me>
 <a878bf6ecb0762730ecc95c40e09d6ba93cb5293@i2pn2.org>
 <vj1qeu$35kfh$1@dont-email.me>
 <3431ec3bd2abdc62d693959664e202aa3bc214bd@i2pn2.org>
 <vj252d$38tkl$1@dont-email.me>
 <9d0a00ef6ef09f7b79e6f91983050dc17afcc151@i2pn2.org>
 <vj2j83$3bqcr$2@dont-email.me>
 <3cf4c994a25e6691c4c62149295bea43ed60c24c@i2pn2.org>
 <vj2miv$3cs24$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2024 00:21:58 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1784771"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vj2miv$3cs24$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 7521
Lines: 148

On 12/7/24 6:43 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/7/2024 5:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 12/7/24 5:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/7/2024 4:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 12/7/24 1:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 12/7/2024 12:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/7/24 10:43 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/7/2024 6:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/7/24 6:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/2024 9:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/2024 8:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/24 9:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/5/2024 11:20 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.12.2024 um 05:20 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe you'll solve your halting problem issues before you 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> die.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am sure that DD correctly emulated by HHH according to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the semantics of the C programming language cannot possibly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reach its own return instruction final halt state.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How does HHH correctly emulated DD, if it isn't give tne 
>>>>>>>>>>>> code for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH that DD calls?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As I have told you many dozens of times HHH and DD share
>>>>>>>>>>> the same global memory space within memory version of the
>>>>>>>>>>> Halt7.obj file.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And thus you admit that your HHH isn’t the required “pure 
>>>>>>>>>> function” as its
>>>>>>>>>> result is dependent on that contents of that global memory, 
>>>>>>>>>> and not just
>>>>>>>>>> its input, as required by the definition of a global function,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> First we have to acknowledge that pure function or not HHH does 
>>>>>>>>> something unprecedented in the history of the halting problem:
>>>>>>>>> HHH does correctly reject its input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, it doesn't do anything "unprecedented".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Changing the subject to a different criteria
>>>>>>> IS CHEATING USING THE STRAWMAN DECEPTION
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right, which is what *YOU* have done. As your subject says, you 
>>>>>> are talking about the *HALTING PROPBLEM* which has a defined 
>>>>>> criteeria
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When I say the the work that I accomplished ON MY CRITERIA
>>>>> has never been done before IT IS WOEFULLY DISHONEST to
>>>>> rebut this by changing the subject to some other criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then the work you have accopmllished is just a LIE.
>>>>
>>>> Just like the climare and election deniers.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote a paper on climate change
>>> Severe anthropogenic climate change proven entirely with verifiable 
>>> facts
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
>>> publication/336568434_Severe_anthropogenic_climate_change_proven_entirely_with_verifiable_facts
>>
>>
>> So? Your claim you get to redefine the terms of the problem allow the 
>> deniers to do the same.
>>
>>>
>>> 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);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> When I say that simulating termination analyzer HHH does
>>> correctly reject DD on the basis that DD emulated by HHH**
>>> does not halt THIS IS A MATTER OF FACT.
>>
>> But is irrelevent for the problem you claim to be working on, 
> 
> First you must understand it is true otherwise we cannot
> proceed to the next step of relevance.
> 

No, first you must understand that the claim, in the context of the 
Halting Problem, is just a LIE.

All you are doing is PROVING beyond a doubt, that you are nothing but a 
pathological liar that doesn't care about the truth,

Sorry, but that IS a fact.

And, your claim is just meaningless garbage, because either you admit 
that your HHH isn't a pure function, and thus your claim is false, as I 
have shown how to make a non-pure version of HHH that can do what you 
say is impossible, or you need to admit that you HHH, by using code that 
isn't the input, fails to meet the requirements, or, you have to add HHH 
to the input, and then you lie about "no HHH" is sperious, as there can 
only be ONE HHH that is the HHH that DD calls, and the other HHHs need 
to be put elsewhere in memory, and some of them WILL be able to emulate 
that full input to completion.

So, your claim that your claim is correct, is just a blantant lie that 
you implicitly admit to by not even trying to refute the error pointed out.

Sorry, but you are just confirming that you just don't know what you are 
doing, amd that will be your legacy when you die soon.