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: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Flibble=E2=80=99s_Leap=3A_Why_Behavioral_Divergence?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?_Implies_a_Type_Distinction_in_the_Halting_Problem?=
Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 20:43:32 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 98
Message-ID: <vvrg7j$mv2a$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vv1UP.77894$JJT6.54808@fx16.ams4> <vvqd4u$g8a1$1@dont-email.me>
 <7N2UP.527443$wBt6.464256@fx15.ams4> <vvqfgq$gmmk$1@dont-email.me>
 <os3UP.670056$BFJ.223954@fx13.ams4> <vvqgpt$gmmk$4@dont-email.me>
 <aG3UP.366972$wBVe.321504@fx06.ams4> <vvqhaj$gldn$6@dont-email.me>
 <bV3UP.101097$0ia.1168@fx11.ams4> <vvqkff$gldn$13@dont-email.me>
 <WH4UP.229898$_Npd.172992@fx01.ams4> <vvqm03$i3hn$1@dont-email.me>
 <g55UP.688178$4AM6.545580@fx17.ams4>
 <87o6vy4ulc.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvrb1g$me5h$2@dont-email.me>
 <f2bc11d4d57ba6260c0cca597204057a28c8276e@i2pn2.org>
 <vvrg32$n9a9$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 02:43:32 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d587ba6f088c47ed8fd2ad250ebfd646";
	logging-data="752714"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/HEvRXyGOJwqnOJH3dqsHa"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kStzs6Blw/VZAAGfdkkCgwZGH1Q=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vvrg32$n9a9$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5167

On 5/11/2025 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/11/2025 6:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/11/25 7:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/11/2025 6:05 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>> Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> writes:
>>>>> On Sun, 11 May 2025 18:15:47 +0100, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/05/2025 17:59, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>> it is impossible to obtain a halting result
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That sure looks like a concession that it's impossible to devise an
>>>>>> algorithm that will produce a halting result.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well done. We got you there in the end.
>>>>>
>>>>> No. The reason why it is impossible to obtain a halting result for
>>>>> pathological input is not the reason proposed by Turing (i.e. self-
>>>>> referential diagonalization), it is impossible to obtain a halting 
>>>>> result
>>>>> for pathological input because the self-referential conflation of 
>>>>> decider
>>>>> and input is a category error that prevents us from performing
>>>>> diagonalization.
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible to determine whether a given input is "pathological" 
>>>> or not?
>>>>
>>>>> To usefully advance research in this area pathological input needs 
>>>>> to be
>>>>> excluded from the set of programs that can be analysed by a decider.
>>>>
>>>> Can this exclusion be performed reliably and consistently?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is a good question. The answer is definitely
>>> yes. When HHH emulates DDD it only needs to see
>>> that DDD is calling itself with no conditional branch
>>> instructions inbetween.
>>>
>>> Whether a function computed by a Turing machine can
>>> do this is a different question.
>>>
>>
>> So, try to do it.
>>
> 
> No need to. DDD emulated by HHH according to the
> rules of the computational language that DD is
> encoded within 

Doesn't happen, as you have admitted on the record:


On 5/5/2025 8:24 AM, dbush wrote:
 > On 5/4/2025 11:03 PM, dbush wrote:
 >> On 5/4/2025 10:05 PM, olcott wrote:
 >>> On 5/4/2025 7:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 >>>> But HHH doesn't correct emulated DD by those rules, as those rules
 >>>> do not allow HHH to stop its emulation,
 >>>
 >>> Sure they do you freaking moron...
 >>
 >> Then show where in the Intel instruction manual that the execution of
 >> any instruction other than a HLT is allowed to stop instead of
 >> executing the next instruction.
 >>
 >> Failure to do so in your next reply, or within one hour of your next
 >> post on this newsgroup, will be taken as you official on-the-record
 >> admission that there is no such allowance and that HHH does NOT
 >> correctly simulate DD.
 >
 > Let the record show that Peter Olcott made the following post in this
 > newsgroup after the above message:
 >
 > On 5/4/2025 11:04 PM, olcott wrote:
 >  > D *WOULD NEVER STOP RUNNING UNLESS*
 >  > indicates that professor Sipser was agreeing
 >  > to hypotheticals AS *NOT CHANGING THE INPUT*
 >  >
 >  > You are taking
 >  > *WOULD NEVER STOP RUNNING UNLESS*
 >  > to mean *NEVER STOPS RUNNING* that is incorrect.
 >
 > And has made no attempt after over 9 hours to show where in the Intel
 > instruction manual that execution is allowed to stop after any
 > instruction other than HLT.
 >
 > Therefore, as per the above criteria:
 >
 > LET THE RECORD SHOW
 >
 > That Peter Olcott
 >
 > Has *officially* admitted
 >
 > That DD is NOT correctly simulated by HHH