Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input
 to HHH(DD)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 02:37:39 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 151
Message-ID: <dc76ef3215a83481dfddc40c466bb9ebc0e77341.camel@gmail.com>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me> <vvinvp$1vglb$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vviv75$222r6$1@dont-email.me> <vvj1fp$22a62$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvj2j6$23gk7$1@dont-email.me> <as9TP.251456$lZjd.93653@fx05.ams4>
	 <87msbmeo3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjcge$27753$2@dont-email.me>
	 <vvjeqf$28555$1@dont-email.me> <vvjffg$28g5i$1@dont-email.me>
	 <875xiaejzg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjgt1$28g5i$5@dont-email.me>
	 <87jz6qczja.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjotc$28g5i$12@dont-email.me>
	 <vvnh9u$3hd96$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
	 <vvno4e$3in62$2@dont-email.me>
	 <5b14da4260c0b7e3235ce05f752c092fade4d70e.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvnsae$3in62$9@dont-email.me>
	 <11cc09876004107c47467b9481f614f45f450f2c.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvnu9k$3k258$2@dont-email.me>
	 <674a661e498281cca55b322cbd5905a1988a6171.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvnvut$3kher$3@dont-email.me>
	 <088556c03067d8de7184bf88dd01cc6b8c99ba1b.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvo1ni$3l14p$1@dont-email.me>
	 <c09f468e8485c22150cedb12a9010b401f292054.camel@gmail.com>
	 <vvo58a$3lnkd$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 20:37:40 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c665478d8699930ce63ac26f3a79e21a";
	logging-data="3863741"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/pqIKgsoWtSfbcSj9ZLocU"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w4l1Mq3EjqXbPNjZE0A4bSLSqe4=
In-Reply-To: <vvo58a$3lnkd$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 8512

On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 13:17 -0500, olcott wrote:
> On 5/10/2025 1:09 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 12:17 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > On 5/10/2025 12:01 PM, wij wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 11:47 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > On 5/10/2025 11:29 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 11:19 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 11:06 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 10:45 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 10:28 AM, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 09:33 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 7:37 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Am 09.05.2025 um 04:22 schrieb olcott:
> > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at their replies to this post.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Not a one of them will agree that
> > > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > > > void DDD()
> > > > > > > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 HHH(DD=
D);
> > > > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return=
; // final halt state
> > > > > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > > > When 1 or more instructions of DDD are correctly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > simulated by HHH then the correctly simulated DDD=
 cannot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > possibly reach its "return" instruction (final ha=
lt state).
> > > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > > > They have consistently disagreed with this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > simple point for three years.
> > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > > I guess that not even a professor of theoretical co=
mputer
> > > > > > > > > > > > science would spend years working on so few lines o=
f code.
> > > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > I created a whole x86utm operating system.
> > > > > > > > > > > It correctly determines that the halting problem's
> > > > > > > > > > > otherwise "impossible" input is actually non halting.
> > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > int DD()
> > > > > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 int Halt_S=
tatus =3D HHH(DD);
> > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (Halt_S=
tatus)
> > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0 HERE: goto HERE;
> > > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return Hal=
t_Status;
> > > > > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
> > > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > > Nope.
> > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0From I know HHH(DD) decid=
es whether the input DD is "impossible" input or
> > > > > > > > > > not.
> > > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > > DD has the standard form of the "impossible" input.
> > > > > > > > > HHH merely rejects it as non-halting.
> > > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > > You said 'merely' rejects it as non-halting.
> > > > > > > > So, POOH do not answer the input of any other function?
> > > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > The input that has baffled computer scientists for 90
> > > > > > > years is merely correctly determined to be non-halting
> > > > > > > when the behavior of this input is measured by HHH
> > > > > > > emulating this input according to the rules of the x86
> > > > > > > language.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > The same thing applies to the Linz proof yet cannot
> > > > > > > be understood until after HHH(DDD) and HHH(DD) are
> > > > > > > fully understood.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > HHH(DDD) (whatever) at most says DDD is a pathological/midtaken=
 input.
> > > > > > Others of what you say are your imagine and wishes, so far so t=
rue.
> > > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > DDD emulated by HHH accor not the 'HHH' that makes the final deci=
sion
> > (otherwise, it will be an infinite recursive call which you agreed)
> >=20
> > > > > ding to the rules of
> > > > > the x86 language specifies recursive emulation
> > > > > that cannot possibly reach the final halt state
> > > > > of DDD.
> > > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > > > I have no problem with that. And, you said HHH merely rejects it as=
 non-halting.
> > > > You had denied HHH can decide the halting property of any input, ex=
cept DDD/DD/D..
> > > >=20
> > >=20
> > > As long as HHH correctly determines the halt status
> > > of a single input that has no inputs then HHH is
> > > a correct termination analyzer for that input.
> >=20
> > Go it, that is a stronger statement that HHH ONLY decides DD.
> > I have no problem with that, but be noticed that the HHH inside DD
> > is not the 'HHH' that makes the final decision (otherwise, the 'HHH'
> > will be an infinite recursive which cannot make any decision, which
> > you had agreed)
> >=20
>=20
> HHH(DD) correctly determines that its input specifies
> recursive emulation when this input is emulated by HHH
> HHH according to the rules of the x86 language.

From the about, so you are talking about 'the HHH' which does not compute t=
he final decision.

> *Thus exactly meets the following specification*
> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates=
 its
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 input D until H correctly determines that its si=
mulated D
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 would never stop running unless aborted then
>=20
> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 H can abort its simulation of D and correctly re=
port that D

This H won't be the same HHH inside the DD, otherwise an infinite recursive=
 call happens.

> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 specifies a non-halting sequence of configuratio=
ns.
> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>=20
> Professor Sipser is the best selling author of theory of
> computation textbooks.
> It is a pity that he could never take the five more minutes
> required to understand the notion of recursive emulation and
> thus see the significance of my work.

You can cite any one, I don't know who Sipsper is.
But yes, it is also a pity that Socrites and Turing did not know POOH.