Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:09:54 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <v3v4bi$22vrk$7@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me>
 <J_CdnTaA96jxpcD7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87h6eamkgf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v3kcdj$3stk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3kjs9$3u7ng$1@dont-email.me> <v3l16f$5d3$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3mj84$bq2d$1@dont-email.me> <v3njiv$gatu$9@dont-email.me>
 <v3p37n$sb6j$1@dont-email.me> <v3poj0$v133$6@dont-email.me>
 <v3rvri$1ervp$1@dont-email.me> <v3sene$1gra7$10@dont-email.me>
 <v3sjer$1i8m9$1@dont-email.me> <v3sjvt$1i9ju$2@dont-email.me>
 <v3u8vq$1v5pb$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 16:09:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ad5aa88e540ea762834522b410d9de6a";
	logging-data="2195316"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IRhOL+T/9Kmt+xYPdSC5x"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cdciToBdoaZUMffa6v4fsj3YD/E=
In-Reply-To: <v3u8vq$1v5pb$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3543

On 6/7/2024 1:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-06-06 15:18:21 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>> *Here is that problem statement*
>> Prove that sum(3,4) is incorrect on the basis that
>> sum(3,4) cannot and does not provide the sum of 5 + 6.
> 
> That problem statement does not restrict what another
> problem statement may specify.
> 

It is an analogy.

All halt deciders are only allowed to report on the actual
behavior of their actual input.

I have proven right here that the actual behavior of the actual
input is that it remains stuck in recursive simulation.

Try any show how this DD can be correctly simulated by any HH
such that this DD reaches past its machine address [00001dbe]

_DD()
[00001e12] 55         push ebp
[00001e13] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp
[00001e15] 51         push ecx
[00001e16] 8b4508     mov  eax,[ebp+08]
[00001e19] 50         push eax      ; push DD
[00001e1a] 8b4d08     mov  ecx,[ebp+08]
[00001e1d] 51         push ecx      ; push DD
[00001e1e] e85ff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH

I proved that I am correct and no one even looks
at this proof, that is NOT AN HONEST DIALOGUE.

The above proof proves that DD is correctly simulated by HH
and DD simulated by HH DOES MEET the Sipser approve criteria.

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
   If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
   until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
   stop running unless aborted then

   H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
   specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words10/13/2022>

Professor Sipser <is> the author of the best selling theory of
computation textbook.

*Introduction to the Theory of Computation, by Michael Sipser*
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael-Sipser/dp/113318779X/


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