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: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Very Stupid
 Mistake and Liars
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:54:34 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <vqr0hq$2e4f4$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vqntaq$1jut5$1@dont-email.me> <vqp388$1tvqa$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqpdv9$202b2$2@dont-email.me> <vqperb$20c9k$2@dont-email.me>
 <E6mcnWv3nMa66036nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vqqnk5$28jtr$1@dont-email.me> <vqqonm$28lh2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqqq09$28kp8$1@dont-email.me> <vqqq7s$29buv$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqqrin$28lh2$4@dont-email.me> <vqqros$29meg$3@dont-email.me>
 <vqqvu3$2e4bo$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 04:54:35 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="da28212957632e1bc35b68d4fbc88507";
	logging-data="2560484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX191/QCHaTE+naVdI8jD3uzo"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gH61s/P2v24Vg6bD8dSjplmTDRM=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250311-4, 3/11/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <vqqvu3$2e4bo$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3993

On 3/11/2025 10:44 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 12/03/2025 02:33, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/11/2025 9:29 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 12/03/2025 02:06, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:02 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>> On 3/11/2025 9:41 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/03/2025 01:22, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
>>>>>>> own "return" instruction and terminates normally
>>>>>>> in any finite or infinite number of correctly
>>>>>>> simulated steps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it correctly simulates infinitely many steps, it doesn't 
>>>>>> terminate. Look up "infinite".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But your task is to decide for /any/ program, not just DDD. That, 
>>>>>> as you are so fond of saying, is 'stipulated', and you can't get 
>>>>>> out of it. The whole point of the Entscheidungsproblem is its 
>>>>>> universality. Ignore that, and you have nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that his code has HHH(DD) returning 0, 
>>>>
>>>> THESE ARE THE WORDS ANYONE THAT DODGES THESE
>>>> WORDS WILL BE TAKEN FOR A LIAR
>>>
>>>
>>> "THESE ARE THE WORDS ANYONE THAT DODGES THESE WORDS WILL BE TAKEN FOR 
>>> A LIAR"?
>>>
>>> Is that all you've got? Nothing on your function's inability to 
>>> correctly decide on whether arbitrary input programs terminate, which 
>>> is a ***stipulated*** requirement for the problem.
>>>
>>> Without that, all you have is loud.
>>>
>>>> void DDD()
>>>> {
>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>    return;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
>>>> own "return" instruction and terminates normally
>>>> in any finite or infinite number of correctly
>>>> simulated steps.
>>>
>>> Look up "infinite". You keep using that word. I do not think it means 
>>> what you think it means.
>>>
>>
>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot
>> possibly f-cking halt no f-cking matter what.
> 
> And anyone other than you should care... because?
> 

DDD is a dumbed down version of DD and thus
isomorphic to DD. DD is isomorphic to the HP
counter example input. DD simulated by HHH
cannot possibly halt.

The DD input to HHH cannot possibly halt and
deciders are not allowed to report on non-inputs.

> The question you continually fail to address is what HHH() does with 
> arbitrary input programs.
> 


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