Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating
 behavior to HHH
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 19:12:04 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <vo6b14$3o0uo$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnv4tf$2a40b$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <vnvv32$2e9m1$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo2pd4$31nli$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <vo2us8$32kg8$1@dont-email.me>
 <228a9804d6919149bac728ccf08134ed90db121e@i2pn2.org>
 <vo3cf0$35449$1@dont-email.me>
 <6f15178eda69b13fae9cbfef29acad05c9c6aeb3@i2pn2.org>
 <vo3t3n$37kcg$1@dont-email.me>
 <1454e934b709b66a0cb9de9e9796cb46fed0425c@i2pn2.org>
 <vo5c8c$3ipo2$2@dont-email.me>
 <f7f9c03f97de054f6393139c74f595f68400ede5@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2025 02:12:05 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="638a60606f1ec4b02fad03c273802d18";
	logging-data="3933144"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18P+QDax+DT17mNO1SEjkc9"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ijFKHi+6VOhE/WtdwAGkkshDu/Y=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <f7f9c03f97de054f6393139c74f595f68400ede5@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250207-6, 2/7/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 4846

On 2/7/2025 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 2/7/25 11:26 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 2/7/2025 6:20 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 2/6/25 10:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 2/6/2025 8:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 2/6/25 5:18 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/6/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/6/25 1:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/6/2025 10:52 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am 05.02.2025 um 16:11 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/5/2025 1:44 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.02.2025 um 04:38 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> This treatment does not typically last very long and
>>>>>>>>>>>> will be immediately followed by a riskier fourth line
>>>>>>>>>>>> of treatment that has an initial success rate much higher
>>>>>>>>>>>> than its non progression mortality rate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Halting problem solved !
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The halting problem proof input does specify non-halting
>>>>>>>>>> behavior to its decider.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
>>>>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LOOOOOOOOL
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyone that understands the C programming language
>>>>>>>> sufficiently well (thus not confused by the unreachable
>>>>>>>> "if" statement) correctly understands that DD simulated
>>>>>>>> by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And anyone that understand the halting problem knows that isn't 
>>>>>>> the question being asked. The quesiton you NEED to ask is will 
>>>>>>> the program described by the input halt when run?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since you start off with the wrong question, you logic is just 
>>>>>>> faulty.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everyone that thinks my question is incorrect is wrong.
>>>>>> It has always been a mathematical mapping from finite
>>>>>> strings to behaviors. That people do not comprehend this
>>>>>> shows the shallowness of the depth of the learned-by-rote
>>>>>> (lack of) understanding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you are just incorreect as you don't know what you are talking 
>>>>> about.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it is a mapping of the string to the behavior, and that 
>>>>> mapping is DEFINED to be the halting behavior of the program the 
>>>>> string describes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No this is incorrect. The input finite string specifies
>>>> (not merely describes) non halting behavior to its decider.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, since the definition of "Halting Behavior" is the behavior of the 
>>> progran being run.
>>>
>>
>> It may seem that way to people that have learned-by-rote
>> as their only basis. It is actually nothing like that.
> 
> No, that *IS* the definition.
> 

A termination analyzer computes the mapping from finite
strings to the actual behavior that these finite strings
specify. That this is not dead obvious to everyone here
merely proves that learned-by-rote does not involve any
actual comprehension.


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