Path: ...!news.nobody.at!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,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Followup-To: comp.theory
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 22:43:34 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 128
Message-ID: <vouepn$10maq$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me> <vo7be3$jug$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo7r8d$36ra$3@dont-email.me> <vo9ura$i5ha$1@dont-email.me>
 <voahc5$m3dj$8@dont-email.me> <vocdo9$14kc0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vocpl7$16c4e$4@dont-email.me> <vof56u$1n9k0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vofnj2$1qh2r$2@dont-email.me> <vohrmi$29f46$1@dont-email.me>
 <vojs0e$2oikq$4@dont-email.me> <vokdha$2rcqi$1@dont-email.me>
 <vom1fr$34osr$1@dont-email.me> <von0iq$3d619$1@dont-email.me>
 <vondj5$3ffar$1@dont-email.me> <vopke4$3v10c$1@dont-email.me>
 <vosn00$jd5m$1@dont-email.me>
 <f9a0a18d52ac35171173e0c60c9062e03343ad68@i2pn2.org>
 <vote0u$nf28$1@dont-email.me>
 <dd1b0c9910f7e5b7ea0b0c67b38559929af3ba28@i2pn2.org>
 <votnk9$pb7c$3@dont-email.me>
 <247d795c20365feb849ed3911fdff318bcec74b0@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 05:43:36 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="55615c65eddb2f78b0e126c64450bd72";
	logging-data="1071450"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Gyp4aTZj8jopqpT5VBgNx"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:M94n0loNCZIvtcro0OA6eXTuXq0=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250216-6, 2/16/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <247d795c20365feb849ed3911fdff318bcec74b0@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6762

On 2/16/2025 7:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 2/16/25 5:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 2/16/2025 3:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 2/16/25 2:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 2/16/2025 10:35 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Sun, 16 Feb 2025 06:51:12 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/15/2025 2:49 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-02-14 12:40:04 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> On 2/14/2025 2:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-14 00:07:23 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2025 3:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-13 04:21:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/12/2025 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-11 14:41:38 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course not. However, the fact that no reference to that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article before or when HHH
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That paper and its code are the only thing that I have been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talking about in this forum for several years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't matter when you don't say that you are talking 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> about that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, that is irrelevant to the fact that the subject line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains a false claim.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a truism and not one person on the face of the Earth can
>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly show otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The fact that the claim on subject line is false is not a 
>>>>>>>>>>> truism.
>>>>>>>>>>> In order to determine the claim is false one needs some 
>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>>>>>>> that is not obvious.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When you try to show the steps attempting to show that it is 
>>>>>>>>>> false I
>>>>>>>>>> will point out the error.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Step 1: Find people who know C.
>>>>>>>>> Step 2: Show them DD of OP and ask.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is the only topic that I will discuss and any
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>     int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>     return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>     HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> DD  correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That claim has already shown to be false. Nothing above shows 
>>>>>>> that HHH
>>>>>>> does not return 0. If it does DD also returns 0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> When we are referring to the above DD simulated by HHH and not 
>>>>>> trying to
>>>>>> get away with changing the subject to some other DD somewhere else
>>>>> such as one that calls a non-aborting version of HHH
>>>>>
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> anyone with sufficient knowledge of C programming knows that no 
>>>>>> instance
>>>>>> of DD shown above simulated by any corresponding instance of HHH can
>>>>>> possibly terminate normally.
>>>>
>>>>> Well, then that corresponding (by what?) HHH isn’t a decider.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Technically a decider is any TM that always stops running.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decider_(Turing_machine)
>>>>
>>>> I am focusing on the isomorphic notion of a termination analyzer.
>>>> A simulating termination analyzer correctly rejects any input
>>>> that must be aborted to prevent its own non-termination.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Right, but the answer given by the decider must match the problem.
>>>
>>
>> Any divergence from the above specification is stipulated
>> to be incorrect.
> 
> In other words, you are ADMITTING you have no idea of the actual 
> problem, and think people are interested in your strawman.
> 
> The WORLD will reject any divergence from the actual specification, 
> leaving you out in the dark just admitting you are a moron.
> 
>>
>> *This is the pathological input termination analyzer problem*
>> Some people might see this as isomorphic to other problems
>> and some people may not see this.
>>
> 
> In other words, you are just now admitting you have been LYING for 
> decades, because you were too stupid to understand what you were 
> claiming you were working.
> 
> Glad you finally admitted it.
> 
> The POOP theory is admitted to be just a pile of shit that you made up, 
> and says NOTHING about the real Halting Problem that you are admitting 
> is too "complecated" for you to undetstand.
> 
> Sorry, that is the facts of what you just said.

I am stipulating that I have solved the simulating
termination analyzer pathological input problem.

Some people will see a remarkable similarity to the
halting problem proofs, and some will not.

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer