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: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 17:28:14 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 111
Message-ID: <voojie$3mdke$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$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> <vocd0e$14a92$1@dont-email.me>
 <vocp7p$16c4e$2@dont-email.me> <vocqjl$16qj7$1@dont-email.me>
 <vocrbl$16uuv$1@dont-email.me> <vodh9d$1ar1l$1@dont-email.me>
 <vodo13$1ccae$1@dont-email.me>
 <f4a1a9c106d4490f0ede6900ed3327ea4110624a@i2pn2.org>
 <vofne1$1qh2r$1@dont-email.me> <vofsqb$1q3mf$2@dont-email.me>
 <voftfg$1rkco$2@dont-email.me> <vofupe$1q3mf$3@dont-email.me>
 <vojrgb$2oikq$2@dont-email.me> <vokiuo$2s1tr$1@dont-email.me>
 <vom1jj$34osr$2@dont-email.me>
 <bf2ebcb7fa687306a75c0a85d0fd2dc959898d92@i2pn2.org>
 <vomgag$3anm4$1@dont-email.me>
 <8be76c6ce027ec61028d5081e95717b145b70f24@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:28:15 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="49a7b1e260930a7dc625a6fb83875212";
	logging-data="3880590"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/7wd+uxR9hqKo8A0qNWmtF"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:larp7g7VI3dD3iLRN6xpfqJwZaQ=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250214-6, 2/14/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <8be76c6ce027ec61028d5081e95717b145b70f24@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 7586

On 2/14/2025 6:53 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Thu, 13 Feb 2025 22:20:32 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>> On 2/13/2025 9:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 2/13/25 7:09 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 2/13/2025 4:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 13.feb.2025 om 05:12 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 10:44 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 11.feb.2025 om 17:22 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 10:10 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 11.feb.2025 om 15:38 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 1:28 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:36:51 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 12:41 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 10.feb.2025 om 13:27 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 6:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 10.feb.2025 om 12:51 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 2:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:54 schreef 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:
> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is true as a verified fact and has been pointed out to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Olcott many times, but he refuses to learn. So, again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that main halts,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that the input to HHH(main) cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, the verified fact is that the input can terminatie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The directly executed main IS NOT THE INPUT TO HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This main is a program that includes all functions called
>>>>>>>>>>>>> directly and indirectly, including HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(main) when correctly simulated by HHH cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The input to HHH, which is main(), terminates. HHH does not
>>>>>>>>>>> simulate that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The directly executed main() is not the same instance of main()
>>>>>>>>>> that is input to HHH and simulated by HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The directly executed main() relies on HHH aborting the
>>>>>>>>>> simulation of its input. HHH cannot rely on anything else
>>>>>>>>>> aborting the simulation of its input.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The simulating HHH should rely on the simulated HHH to abort.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That cannot possibly work. The executed HHH always sees at least
>>>>>>>> one more full execution trace than any inner HHH ever sees.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Indeed, that is what I said, but Olcott deleted it in the citation.
>>>>>>> HHH cannot do what it should do. So, he proves the halting theorem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the sentence it false it does not become true in some greater
>>>>>> context.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed and since it is false that the simulated HHH would not abort,
>>>>
>>>> This is simply beyond your skill level.
>>>> Since each HHH is exactly the same unless the first one aborts none of
>>>> them do.
>>>>
>>> But the first one DOES abort, as that is how it was defined to be.
>>>
>>> And thus, the one that DD calls aborts.
>>>
>> A program that is no longer being simulated DOES NOTHING
> 
> Hey, let me prove all programs are no-ops, by NOT SIMULATING THEM MWAHAHA
> 

DD correctly 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