Path: ...!news-out.netnews.com!s1-1.netnews.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: ChatGPT refutes the key rebuttal of my work
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:30:41 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <bb5c503ba7e505b1901ff9e45f2881dd4d9a2853@i2pn2.org>
References: <vegfro$lk27$9@dont-email.me> <veimqs$14que$1@dont-email.me>
	<veipf3$15764$1@dont-email.me>
	<36ecdefcca730806c7bd9ec03e326fac1a9c8464@i2pn2.org>
	<vejcoj$1879f$1@dont-email.me>
	<034767682966b9ac642993dd2fa0d181c21dfffc@i2pn2.org>
	<vekj4q$1hrgd$1@dont-email.me>
	<f8a15594bf0623a229214e2fb62ce4f4a2bd7116@i2pn2.org>
	<velpm2$1n3gb$6@dont-email.me>
	<8f12bccec21234ec3802cdb3df63fd9566ba9b07@i2pn2.org>
	<vemc30$1q255$1@dont-email.me>
	<3b7102e401dc2d872ab53fd94fc433841caf3170@i2pn2.org>
	<vemhn0$1qqfr$2@dont-email.me>
	<61ffc8131435005aaf8976ddbf109b8f16c77668@i2pn2.org>
	<ven83o$2230b$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:30:41 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2247835"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Received-Bytes: 3886
Bytes: 4056
Lines: 47

Am Tue, 15 Oct 2024 21:23:52 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 10/15/2024 9:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 10/15/24 4:01 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2024 2:33 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:25:36 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 10/15/2024 10:17 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Tue, 15 Oct 2024 08:11:30 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 10/15/2024 6:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 11:18 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 7:06 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 04:49:22 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-13 12:53:12 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
>>>>>>>>> When you click on the link and try to explain how HHH must be
>>>>>>>>> wrong when it reports that DDD does not terminate because DDD
>>>>>>>>> does terminate it will explain your mistake to you.
>>>>>>>> I did that, and it admitted that DDD halts, it just tries to
>>>>>>>> justify why a wrong answer must be right.
>>>>>>> It explains in great detail that another different DDD (same
>>>>>>> machine code different process context) seems to terminate only
>>>>>>> because the recursive emulation that it specifies has been aborted
>>>>>>> at its second recursive call.
>>>>>> Yes! It really has different code, by way of the static Root
>>>>>> variable.
>>>>>> No wonder it behaves differently.
>>>>> There are no static root variables. There never has been any "not a
>>>>> pure function of its inputs" aspect to emulation.
>>>> Oh, did you take out the check if HHH is the root simulator?
>>> There is some code that was obsolete several years ago.
>> No, that code is still active. it is the source of the value for the
>> variable Root that is passed around, and is checked in the code to
>> alter the behavior.
> It has no effect on the trace itself.
Other than producing a different trace. Seriously, why else should it
be in there?

> It only affects the termination status decision that I conclusively
> prove is unequivocally correct no matter how HHH detects this.
Sure, "DDD is the same program, except for a variable which directly
changes termination" lol.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.