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 Correctly rejected as
 non-halting V2
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 19:46:17 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <7c0386e256ec23367c8653ed7b734989478f80e1@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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 23:46:17 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3137773"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v6v2t1$3pmjn$3@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3704
Lines: 44

On 7/13/24 7:33 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/13/2024 6:26 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:47:46 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 7/13/2024 5:40 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 09:31:33 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 7/13/2024 9:21 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:34:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 7/13/2024 8:24 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:04:01 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2024 7:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 13.jul.2024 om 13:39 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2024 3:15 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 13.jul.2024 om 01:19 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/12/2024 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/12/24 10:56 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As soon as the decider correctly determines that itself would
>>>>>>>>> never halt unless is aborts the simulation of its input the
>>>>>>>>> decider is required to abort this simulation.
>>>>>>>> Which decider is aborting here, the simulated or the outer one?
>>>>>>>> A decider always halts, so it cannot find itself non-halting.
>>>>>>> The executed decider is always correct to abort the simulation of
>>>>>>> any damn thing that would cause itself to never halt.
>>>>>> Which is definitely not itself. Simulating a decider is guaranteed to
>>>>>> halt. Same as a simulator that aborts.
>>>>> It cannot abort the simulation of itself because itself is not
>>>>> simulated.
>>>> It certainly is, because the DDD that it simulates calls HHH.
>>> You are thinking of its twin brother.
>> Can you elaborate? All runtime instances share the same static code.
>> I am talking about the inner HHH which is called by the simulated DDD.
>> That one is, according to you, aborted. Which is wrong, because by virtue
>> of running the same code, the inner HHH aborts ITS simulation of DDD
>> calling another HHH.
>>
> 
> If you have a 100% complete understanding infinite recursion
> then I can explain it in terms of much more details, otherwise
> you can't possibly understand.
> 
> 

But the recursion isn't infinite if that HHH ever aborts its emulation.

You are stuck in the trap of your own making.