Path: ...!news.snarked.org!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 21:16:46 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 256
Message-ID: <vp05ff$19vgo$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$1@dont-email.me> <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>
 <voft9v$1rkco$1@dont-email.me>
 <e351c3a68fe9fffc21c6b82a50743305af794dd0@i2pn2.org>
 <vojrqp$2oikq$3@dont-email.me>
 <ffb46665a51356faf0fa3b56db966a31812e8134@i2pn2.org>
 <vokon8$2t882$1@dont-email.me> <vol0mf$2ulu5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vom1q4$34osr$3@dont-email.me> <von3q8$3d901$1@dont-email.me>
 <vone2v$3ffar$3@dont-email.me> <vonibr$3g195$1@dont-email.me>
 <voobvq$3kga9$1@dont-email.me> <vophu2$3ufag$1@dont-email.me>
 <voqpf6$5k6g$1@dont-email.me> <vosc1j$h568$2@dont-email.me>
 <vosnea$jd5m$2@dont-email.me> <voth2j$o3pk$1@dont-email.me>
 <votn62$pb7c$2@dont-email.me> <voutp5$12hqt$1@dont-email.me>
 <vovfov$15ohc$1@dont-email.me> <vovlfh$160g5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vovqjp$17scr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 21:16:48 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="59f2eddee30bf788b32be6c220c2bf66";
	logging-data="1375768"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX180a6IL9RiBTTjlh5CRNNxK"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QZnJ5uX+ncxraxHgmio6l1n3QDo=
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vovqjp$17scr$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 15928

Op 17.feb.2025 om 18:11 schreef olcott:
> On 2/17/2025 9:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 17.feb.2025 om 15:06 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/17/2025 2:59 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 16.feb.2025 om 23:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/16/2025 2:16 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 16.feb.2025 om 13:58 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/16/2025 3:44 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 15.feb.2025 om 20:21 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/15/2025 2:06 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 22:18 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/14/2025 8:01 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 13:48 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/14/2025 3:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 01:12 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2025 8:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 13.feb.2025 om 13:31 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2025 3:16 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Wed, 12 Feb 2025 22:18:32 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 2:05 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:19:11 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not going to ever talk about that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh goody, you’re never getting anywhere if you 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reject corrections.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I reject infinite deflection away from the point. The 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolute
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single-mined focus point is that DD correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by HHH cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That IS the point. DD does nothing else than call HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since there is a 5% chance that the treatment I will 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have next month
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will kill me and this treatment is my only good 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chance I will totally
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore anything that diverges from the point.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, I will wait a month then.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone that knows the C language sufficiently well knows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed, which shows the limitation of HHH which makes 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that it cannot properly decide about its input, because 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it must abort the correct simulation before it sees that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the correct simulation terminates normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========