Path: ...!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: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string
 transformations to inputs VERIFIED FACT
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 10:15:01 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <vutepm$gmbi$4@dont-email.me>
References: <vu6lnf$39fls$2@dont-email.me> <vuj55m$2lf64$10@dont-email.me>
 <vuj8h3$2uahf$3@dont-email.me> <vujfuu$35hcg$1@dont-email.me>
 <65dddfad4c862e6593392eaf27876759b1ed0e69@i2pn2.org>
 <vujlj0$3a526$1@dont-email.me> <vujln7$32om9$8@dont-email.me>
 <vujmmm$3a526$2@dont-email.me> <vujmrj$32om9$9@dont-email.me>
 <vujtcb$3gsgr$1@dont-email.me> <vuju44$3hnda$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuk47o$3qkbb$1@dont-email.me> <vuk6b6$3l184$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuls34$1bf1j$4@dont-email.me> <vun87k$2m24h$2@dont-email.me>
 <vunb06$2fjjl$5@dont-email.me> <vuo57j$3h5l9$2@dont-email.me>
 <vuoath$3ljma$1@dont-email.me> <vuohgi$3td7u$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuonh6$2g74$2@dont-email.me> <vupeor$qf60$1@dont-email.me>
 <vupu0r$18vrc$1@dont-email.me> <vuqj5u$1rljg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuql8e$1svmd$1@dont-email.me> <vur7vd$2dvvs$1@dont-email.me>
 <vur9t9$2gjif$1@dont-email.me> <vurasr$2hkih$1@dont-email.me>
 <vurbgd$2gjif$2@dont-email.me> <vurgt8$2n355$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuric8$2gjif$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 17:15:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="513b7ff7137ccbc73f1df5ad6a929a2f";
	logging-data="547186"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+o6di44DmAPKNuXa8qHMPb"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:naYF6WR92TabA1thoAZJai/lgDY=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250430-2, 4/30/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <vuric8$2gjif$3@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3587

On 4/29/2025 5:03 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 29/04/2025 22:38, olcott wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>
>> int DD()
>> {
>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>    return Halt_Status;
>> }
>>
>> HHH is correct DD as non-halting BECAUSE THAT IS
>> WHAT THE INPUT TO HHH(DD) SPECIFIES.
> 
> You're going round the same loop again.
> 
> Either your HHH() is a universal termination analyser or it isn't. 

The domain of HHH is DD.

> If it 
> isn't, it's irrelevant to the Halting Problem, 

It correctly refutes the conventional proof of the
Halting Problem proofs. The "impossible" input specifies
non-halting behavior and the contradictory part of DD
is unreachable code.

Have you ever done any actual programming?

> and we can ignore it. If 
> it is, however, then we know that it doesn't work for all inputs, even 
> if (as you claim) it works for one.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> DD <is> the Halting Problem counter-example input to HHH.
>>
>>> for the same reason we can't devise a universally accurate 
>>> termination analyser that executes the code to see what happens.
>>>
>>
>> There is no evidence of that.
> 
> Sure there is. Not just evidence, but an actual, rigorous, mathematical 
> proof.
> 


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