Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise ---
 pinned down
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 09:54:14 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <v3i12m$3cpu7$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v39v3h$1mtd9$5@dont-email.me>
 <v3b9kj$2im02$1@i2pn2.org> <v3bale$222n5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bbs2$2im01$1@i2pn2.org> <v3bcre$22a8n$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bduk$2im01$2@i2pn2.org> <v3bedb$22f8h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bfbm$2im01$3@i2pn2.org> <v3bg39$22o6m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3cbhu$2k3ld$1@i2pn2.org> <v3clo2$28p7n$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dft1$2lfup$1@i2pn2.org> <v3dhob$2dio8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dk0d$2lfup$2@i2pn2.org> <v3dkf2$2e2po$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dmnc$2lfup$3@i2pn2.org> <v3do66$2ejq2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dqka$2lfup$4@i2pn2.org> <v3dsev$2f6ul$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dtt4$2lfup$5@i2pn2.org> <v3dvr3$2jgjd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3e0rj$2lfup$6@i2pn2.org> <v3e1m6$2jmc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3f09p$2n53o$1@i2pn2.org> <v3feqn$2rdp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fgat$2n53n$5@i2pn2.org> <v3fhan$2rsbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fhmr$2ro2o$2@dont-email.me> <v3fhv0$2rsbs$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3fpun$2t8n0$1@dont-email.me> <v3fq64$2teib$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3hddb$2psm0$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2024 16:54:15 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3e1a2626012d6c432c11247ed1bf0353";
	logging-data="3565511"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18vhYOR1A+o185mgNXqSukE"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w8J/ITOTx5Bg6N86UTio/CfQPXs=
In-Reply-To: <v3hddb$2psm0$1@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3637

On 6/2/2024 4:18 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Sat, 01 Jun 2024 13:44:21 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> 
>> On 6/1/2024 1:40 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 01.jun.2024 om 18:24 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/1/2024 11:19 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 01.jun.2024 om 18:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 10:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 11:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> HH correctly reports that because DD calls HH(DD,DD) in recursive
>>>> simulation that DD never halts.
>>>>
>>>> HHH(HH,DD,DD) would report that HH halts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Maybe. And H1 (DD,DD) would report that DD halts.
>>>
>>> In the recursive simulation by HH, neither the simulation of DD, nor
>>> the simulation of HH halts. If one of them would halt, the other one
>>> would halt as well.
>>>
>>> So HH 'correctly' reports that both DD and HH do not halt, because they
>>> both keep starting an instance of each other.
> 
> 
>> In case you didn't know pure functions must halt because they must
>> return a value.
> That means it terminates/returns, right? Then H is either not „pure”,
> or execution proceeds past line 4.
> 

Try carefully studying pages 4-5

Pages 4-5 of
*The 2021-09-26 version of my first paper on simulating halt deciders*
*Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351947980_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation 



-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer