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: Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:04:51 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vocq13$16c4e$6@dont-email.me>
References: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me> <vo79lj$8vq$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo7qj9$36ra$1@dont-email.me> <vo8jhj$7fbd$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo9gi6$fuct$1@dont-email.me> <vo9nsk$gu6t$1@dont-email.me>
 <voagr0$m3dj$5@dont-email.me> <voaj18$n6n3$1@dont-email.me>
 <voaljl$no4h$1@dont-email.me> <voalvu$ng5r$1@dont-email.me>
 <voambf$nrgd$1@dont-email.me>
 <2fd02f81a1373810483d993525584bb583d91229@i2pn2.org>
 <vob1af$ptj9$2@dont-email.me>
 <59488994e22555dec69ca38789ce090e6c78ecb2@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 13:04:51 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c492ea1606c78cee9e5da7f1d71e9cb2";
	logging-data="1257614"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Vy84okoURHBzz+TYBx3ZD"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:g/oC6KBoOfBQZmX0KrxDaaMMpa4=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250210-0, 2/9/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <59488994e22555dec69ca38789ce090e6c78ecb2@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3633

On 2/10/2025 5:18 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:03 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>
>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring
>>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates
>>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the
>>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>>
>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated
>>>> by HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination
>>>> value of the DD input to HHH.
>>>
>>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally.
>>>
>> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an entirely
>> different execution trace.

> That is entirely due to how HHH chooses to missimulate it, namely by not
> calling itself, but a different version that doesn’t abort.
> Why do you not pass the same DD as an input to HHH?
> 

The same machine address of DD is the only reference to DD that
any termination analyzer ever sees.


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