Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly halt (Halting Problem)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 15:51:31 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 97
Message-ID: <vth4k2$3a127$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vsnchj$23nrb$2@dont-email.me> <vso4a5$302lq$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsqhuu$1hl94$2@dont-email.me> <vsqknb$1ldpa$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsrmn8$2o2f2$1@dont-email.me> <vstku7$p4u7$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsu95l$1c5kt$1@dont-email.me> <vt01l0$39kn7$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt28vk$1fe7a$1@dont-email.me> <vt2k6t$1onvt$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt3ef4$2flgf$1@dont-email.me> <vt3fgd$2gu7u$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt6apu$12sjs$2@dont-email.me> <vt6g1f$180qf$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt6lmk$1djk6$1@dont-email.me> <vt7tj4$2iso2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt9j0j$1snb$2@dont-email.me> <vtai1c$11kqr$1@dont-email.me>
 <vth4b5$3in23$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 21:51:30 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="acf86990c0c55813e5914ba20d3f0f2e";
	logging-data="3474503"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/RYXssF6OJm2gVtS6wxZg/"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pQ69ic8Hk06NexJ7GY92TdgBQ9Q=
In-Reply-To: <vth4b5$3in23$4@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 4/13/2025 3:46 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/11/2025 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-04-10 23:08:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 4/10/2025 2:56 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-04-09 20:35:30 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/9/2025 1:58 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 09.apr.2025 om 19:29 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/8/2025 10:31 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 08.apr.2025 om 17:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/8/2025 2:45 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.apr.2025 om 06:33 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
>>>>>>>>>>> It is always correct for any simulating termination
>>>>>>>>>>> analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
>>>>>>>>>>> would otherwise prevent its own termination.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In this case there is nothing to prevent, because the finite 
>>>>>>>>>> string specifies a program that halts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This stuff is simply over-your-head.
>>>>>>>>> HHH(DD) meets the above: *Simulating termination analyzer 
>>>>>>>>> Principle*
>>>>>>>>> Anyone with sufficient competence with the C programming language
>>>>>>>>> will understand this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Everyone with a little bit of C knowledge understands that if 
>>>>>>>> HHH returns with a value 0, then DDD halts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DDD CORRECTLY SIMULATED BY HHH
>>>>>>> NOT ANY OTHER DAMN DDD IN THE UNIVERSE NITWIT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If HHH would correctly simulate DD (and the functions called by 
>>>>>> DD) then the simulated HHH would return to DD and DD would halt.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply over your level of technical competence.
>>>>>
>>>>>> But HHH failed to complete the simulation of the halting program,
>>>>>
>>>>> HHH is only required to report on the behavior of its
>>>>> own correct simulation (meaning the according to the
>>>>> semantics of the C programming language) and would be
>>>>> incorrect to report on any other behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>>> because the programmer was dreaming of an infinite recursion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I didn't have to tell you this hundreds of times and you didn't
>>>>>> persist in the straw-man deception I would not have called you a 
>>>>>> nitwit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I really think that you may simply be a troll playing head games.
>>>>
>>>> It is not a good idea to think that everybody is just like you.
>>>
>>> *Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
>>> It is always correct for any simulating termination
>>> analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
>>> would otherwise prevent its own termination.
>>
>> No proof of this principle has been shown so its use is not valid.
>>
> 
> The proof is self-evident.
> Termination analyzers must 

Map the halting function (axiom) therefore rejecting any input that does 
not halt when executed directly is semantically entailed by this axiom.