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: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:31:11 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <vqt90f$2spcd$4@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> <vqs9ck$2lqb2$1@dont-email.me>
 <833547fc4fcbf18f196b7198f221a665a1fa2da0@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 01:31:12 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c857a159987cd29a4265e3ac68f94ca5";
	logging-data="3040653"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/cP7sycZ6A6o/n5qgzjxAO"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hiMni+uKbB2plCCwhKJNFZRSncg=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250312-2, 3/12/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <833547fc4fcbf18f196b7198f221a665a1fa2da0@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4052

On 3/12/2025 5:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/12/25 11:31 AM, 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.
>>>
>>
>> When N steps of DDD are correctly emulated by every element
>> of the set of C functions named HHH that do x86 emulation and
>>
>> N is each element of the set of natural numbers
>>
>> then no DDD of the set of HHH/DDD pairs ever reaches its
>> "return" instruction and terminates normally.
>>
> 
> WRONG, because "DDD reaching its "return" instruction" isn't defined by 
> the HHH that emulates it, 

Thus the Liar Paradox is TRUE because it is ~TRUE
Instances of pathological self-reference
CANNOT BE CORRECTLY IGNORED !!!

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