Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: What is the correct halt status for HHH(DDD) ? --- Tautology
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 14:45:03 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 129
Message-ID: <v6ulg0$3nmaa$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v6ub4i$3luop$1@dont-email.me>
 <ad93b25297ec232cc5605c0979e3b3fe3c9283f2@i2pn2.org>
 <v6ug87$3mpsd$1@dont-email.me>
 <29624b83c2e7ab328d56a2bcbebde2a00b1f7790@i2pn2.org>
 <v6uifl$3n55j$2@dont-email.me>
 <0e5183b652b6c4f856314d6d9ba950d06499e24f@i2pn2.org>
 <v6uk7h$3nd6t$1@dont-email.me>
 <4f2d7319ae484c2cef8c878697426f974e3e83e8@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 21:45:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="52398669a80ff5113c36343403a598c9";
	logging-data="3922250"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+yLvXDBSPTnsaWzBVk0m8I"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:t6vErkO1vUTQLTn9LWEBH9KSWM4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <4f2d7319ae484c2cef8c878697426f974e3e83e8@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 5969

On 7/13/2024 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 7/13/24 3:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/13/2024 2:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 7/13/24 2:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2024 1:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/13/24 2:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/13/2024 12:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/13/24 12:48 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> What is the correct halt status for an input to
>>>>>>>> a simulating termination analyzer that calls its
>>>>>>>> own termination analyzer?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Halting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since HHH defined to be a termination analyzer, by that 
>>>>>>> definition it must return to its caller.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since DDD has no inputs, its behavior isn't affected by any 
>>>>>>> inputs, and thus DDD will halt for ALL input conditions, so 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are stupidly saying that Infinite_Loop() will halt because
>>>>>> it has no inputs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Where did I say no input means halting?
>>>>>
>>>>> I said that since DDD has no inputs, a Termination analyizer 
>>>>> doesn't need to look over all inputs, as there are no inputs to 
>>>>> affect it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe you forget that a Termination Analyzer is not the same thing 
>>>>> as a Halt Decider.
>>>>>
>>>>> A Halt Decider determines if the given program will halt for the 
>>>>> given input, and needs to be given both (if the program takes an 
>>>>> input).
>>>>>
>>>>> A Termination Analyzer determines if a given program will halt for 
>>>>> every possible input, and thus is only given the program, and not 
>>>>> the input to test.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Note, for Infinite_Loop below, it IS possible for a simulator to 
>>>>> detect a condition in a finite amount of time that an unbounded 
>>>>> emulation would never halt, so can answer correctly non-halting.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem with trying to apply that to DDD is it isn't true, give 
>>>>> the DDD that uses the HHH that tries to think it has determined it 
>>>>> to never halt to a actual pure emulator (and thus DDD still calls 
>>>>> that HHH that thinks it has determined that DDD will not halt and 
>>>>> aborts its emulation and returns) then the pure emulatior will see 
>>>>> that HHH make that decisioin and return to DDD which will return.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus HHH can never actually make that same conclusion. You logic is 
>>>>> incorrrect as you presume the input changes with the emulator, but 
>>>>> it actually doesn't, it changes with the emulator you have stated 
>>>>> is the one that gives the correct answer, which you can't change in 
>>>>> the middle of the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for HHH to be a correct termination analysizer it needs to return 
>>>>>>> the value to indicate Halting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>
>>>>> And thus, it WILL return that value to the DDD that calls it, and 
>>>>> that DDD will halt.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your version 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am asking What is the correct halt status for HHH(DDD)
>>>>>> that at least one element of every possible pure function
>>>>>> HHH can provide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only correct answer it is able to give is Halt.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yet any input that must be aborted to prevent the non
>>>> termination of HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
>>>> behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>>
>>> But the DDD that this HHH is given doesn't need to be aborted.
>>>
>>> That is proven by HHH1(DDD).
>>>
>>
>> That is not the same DDD instance and you know it.
>> That is the DDD after HHH has aborted its DDD.
>>
>> My code shows HHH1 creating a process context and
>> HHH creating two more different contexts.
>>
>> HHH1 depends on HHH aborting its own different DDD
>> for the DDD of HHH1 to halt.
>>
> 
> And you ignore the fundamental fact that ALL DDDs built on the same code 
> in HHH will behave the same.
> 

*You are just going to lie about this into perpetuity*
Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non
termination of HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
behavior or it would never need to be aborted.

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