Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Computable Functions --- finite string transformation rules
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 13:51:54 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <vuglkb$it5g$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vsnchj$23nrb$2@dont-email.me> <vtl56j$3aajg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vtlu0a$3vgp0$1@dont-email.me> <vtm04f$2a90$1@dont-email.me>
 <vtm9q8$aut7$1@dont-email.me> <vtmah8$2a90$2@dont-email.me>
 <vtmgen$gs48$1@dont-email.me>
 <c2ad5086dba36124c070173c3e3252967df2fab9@i2pn2.org>
 <vu8g3q$v0qa$1@dont-email.me> <vu8lse$vn9b$1@dont-email.me>
 <vu8og4$13jl5$7@dont-email.me>
 <6d9ae3ac08bbbe4407fc3612441fc2032f949a3d@i2pn2.org>
 <vub168$3clpn$2@dont-email.me>
 <7ac75991b443ba53d52960ddb1932524dea8e03f@i2pn2.org>
 <40b048f71fe2ed2a8ef11d2d587c765c8fcbc977@i2pn2.org>
 <vucrgq$148pf$1@dont-email.me> <vudkt8$1ona3$2@dont-email.me>
 <vudp39$1rhdn$1@dont-email.me> <vudrgb$20gck$1@dont-email.me>
 <vue2fb$27hl3$1@dont-email.me> <vue464$28iho$2@dont-email.me>
 <3fcc6700e2a832dbae42afd82a4e2cf3a9d85dee@i2pn2.org>
 <vueta8$31sno$1@dont-email.me> <vuettb$31h9n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuf4gv$38ei5$1@dont-email.me> <vuftks$3tsjm$1@dont-email.me>
 <vugkee$it5g$1@dont-email.me> <vugks6$i5k4$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 20:51:55 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="aa2f621221319f55dcdd2d6fed49543e";
	logging-data="619696"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ZlQTa7hVKbYat5eg6rccd"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LkxWXXsd3+dYcNAlIcJKtZ6HQT8=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250425-6, 4/25/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <vugks6$i5k4$1@dont-email.me>

On 4/25/2025 1:39 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 4/25/2025 2:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/25/2025 7:02 AM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 4/25/2025 12:53 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/2025 10:00 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>> On 4/24/2025 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/24/2025 6:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/24/25 3:41 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/24/2025 2:12 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 24.apr.2025 om 19:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> HHH correctly determines through mathematical induction that
>>>>>>>>>> DD emulated by HHH (according to the finite string 
>>>>>>>>>> transformations
>>>>>>>>>> specified by the x86 language) cannot possibly reach its final
>>>>>>>>>> halt state in an infinite number of steps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, HHH has a bug which makes that it fails to see that there 
>>>>>>>>> is only a finite recursion, 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *You are technically incompetent on this point*
>>>>>>>> When the finite string transformation rules of the
>>>>>>>> x86 language are applied to the input to HHH(DD)
>>>>>>>> THIS DD CANNOT POSSIBLY REACH ITS FINAL HALT STATE
>>>>>>>> not even after an infinite number of emulated steps.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When the defined finite string trasnsformation rules, thos of the 
>>>>>>> x86 language, are applied to this input, completed with the 
>>>>>>> definitions from Halt7.c as stipulated, we see that DD calls 
>>>>>>> HHH(DD), that it will spend some time emulating DDm then it will
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correctly determine that DD emulated by HHH can never possibly
>>>>>> reach its final halt state even after an infinite number of
>>>>>> steps are emulated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Category error.  The fixed code of algorithm HHH, which is part of 
>>>>> the input as you agreed, emulates for a fixed number of steps. 
>>>>> Therefore there is no infinite number of steps emulated by 
>>>>> algorithm HHH.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are flat out stupid about hypothetical possibilities.
>>>> Of every possible HHH/DD pair where DD calls HHH(DD) and
>>>> DD is emulated by HHH according to the finite string transformation
>>>> rules of the x86 language no DD ever reaches its own final halt state.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In other words, you're hypothesizing changing the input.
>>>
>>> Changing the input, hypothetically or otherwise, is not allowed.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I am only saying the ALL X are Y.
>> Only Trolls would have difficulty with this.
> 
> No, you're saying that 

For every possible HHH/DD pair where HHH emulates 0 to ∞
instructions of DD (according to the finite string
transformation rules specified by the x86 language)
no DD ever reaches its final halt state.

When ALL X are Y then zero X are not Y, Trolls may disagree.

int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}

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