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: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:19:11 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <voft9v$1rkco$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$1@dont-email.me> <vo3t3n$37kcg$1@dont-email.me>
 <1454e934b709b66a0cb9de9e9796cb46fed0425c@i2pn2.org>
 <vo5c8c$3ipo2$2@dont-email.me>
 <f7f9c03f97de054f6393139c74f595f68400ede5@i2pn2.org>
 <vo6b14$3o0uo$1@dont-email.me>
 <274abb70abec9d461ac3eb34c0980b7421f5fabd@i2pn2.org>
 <vo6rhd$3tsq7$1@dont-email.me> <vo79pq$8vq$2@dont-email.me>
 <vo7qqb$36ra$2@dont-email.me> <vo8jr6$7fbd$2@dont-email.me>
 <vo9gth$fuct$2@dont-email.me> <vo9o3h$gu6t$2@dont-email.me>
 <voah0r$m3dj$6@dont-email.me> <voambu$ng5r$2@dont-email.me>
 <voamvc$nv62$1@dont-email.me> <voatki$p4au$2@dont-email.me>
 <voau7d$p4sc$2@dont-email.me> <voavuf$p4au$4@dont-email.me>
 <vob15v$ptj9$1@dont-email.me>
 <e3693316b91f4bd357aa26a12ebd469086c11c65@i2pn2.org>
 <vocpt8$16c4e$5@dont-email.me>
 <7ad847dee2cf3bc54cddc66a1e521f8a7242c01f@i2pn2.org>
 <vod3ft$18eoa$1@dont-email.me>
 <50488790b3d697cccde5689919b1d1d001b01965@i2pn2.org>
 <vodrkt$1d1gu$1@dont-email.me>
 <cdaa950d75c0b258288974055228e93f38067535@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 17:19:12 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2bd46967c94f87f70aef9b09a146468d";
	logging-data="1954200"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/7dgxabm6RrbyZe4Vp3Ttw"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Q9x8SBaLl0wQj5ehkm9HKbwV+CI=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250210-8, 2/10/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <cdaa950d75c0b258288974055228e93f38067535@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 7451

On 2/11/2025 9:23 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:38:37 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>> On 2/10/2025 2:48 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:46:21 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 2/10/2025 6:52 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:02:48 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 5:16 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:54:39 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 1:33 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 12:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 18:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:50 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:18 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:10 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:47 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 06:53 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 7:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/25 8:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which proves that HHH fails to make a correct decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about DD's halting behaviour. All other methods (direct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation by a world class simulator, etc.) show that DD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halts. But HHH fails to see it. Everyone with sufficient
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of programming sees that HHH is not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly programmed when it aborts one cycle before the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation would end normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The execution trace only shows that HHH is unable to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complete its simulation, because HHH is unable to simulate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It turns out that Olcott does not even understand this simple
>>>>>>>>>>>>> proof that HHH produces false negatives. HHH is unable to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulate itself up to the normal termination.
>>>>>>>>>>> So, in other words, Olcott denies verified facts.
>>>>>>>>>>> HHH generates false negatives, as is verified in
>>>>>>>>>>>             int main() {
>>>>>>>>>>>               return HHH(main);
>>>>>>>>>>>             }
>>>>>>>>>>> but he denies it.
>>>>>>>>>>> He lacks the ability to accept simple verified facts, which he
>>>>>>>>>>> tries to hide with a lot of irrelevant words.
>>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that main cannot possibly be correctly
>>>>>>>>>> simulated by HHH until its normal termination.
>>>>>>>>> Indeed, which proves that HHH is unable to simulate itself
>>>>>>>>> correctly.
>>>>>>>> If this was true then you could point out exactly where HHH is
>>>>>>>> incorrect.
>>>>>>> HHH is supposed to be a decider, i.e. halt and return the correct
>>>>>>> value.
>>>>>> The directly executed HHH(DD) always halts and returns a correct
>>>>>> value as soon as it correctly determines that its input cannot
>>>>>> possibly terminate normally.
>>>>> We were talking about HHH(HHH). If the outer HHH halts according to
>>>>> spec, so does the inner, because it is the same. Therefore it can’t
>>>>> report „non-halting” and be correct. If the inner HHH doesn’t halt,
>>>>> it is not a decider.
>>> RSVP
> Hello?
> 

I am not going to ever talk about that.

>>>>>>>> Here is the code point out the (nonexistent) error:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c#L502
>>>>> Look at it.
>>>> That is not an error.
>>>> It is a verified fact that DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot
>>>> possibly terminate normally. The line you referred to does not change
>>>> that verified fact.
>>> You didn’t look at it.
>> I did look at it and was pleased that you noticed the significance of
>> this line-of-code. None-the-less it does not and cannot possibly alter
>> the truism that DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.

> The significance of that line is that it changes the halting behaviour
> of HHH.
> 

So you have a very hard time staying laser focused
on the actual exact point that this line-of-code:

HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT DD
SIMULATED BY HHH CANNOT POSSIBLY TERMINATE NORMALLY.



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