Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: John Smith <news2@immibis.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike
 Terry Error
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:40:52 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <v3q0u4$q84p$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me>
 <J_CdnTaA96jxpcD7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87h6eamkgf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v3kcdj$3stk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3l7uo$13cp$8@dont-email.me> <v3lcat$228t$3@dont-email.me>
 <v3mq9j$chc3$1@dont-email.me> <v3mrli$chc4$1@dont-email.me>
 <_gWdnbwuZPJP2sL7nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v3nkqr$h7f9$3@dont-email.me> <v3oeh5$jthg$2@dont-email.me>
 <v3of8e$lirl$1@dont-email.me> <v3ofld$jthh$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3oh8l$pi6u$3@dont-email.me> <v3ohkh$jthg$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3ohvb$pi6u$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 17:40:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e20281d0cb42f07e03be2b832eb82761";
	logging-data="860313"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/+HjJOruywFccMU+xn9FQD"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ghpnsJ7ICv9we7H1VzGnp8oWQTM=
In-Reply-To: <v3ohvb$pi6u$5@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3164

On 5/06/24 04:19, olcott wrote:
> On 6/4/2024 9:13 PM, John Smith wrote:
>> On 5/06/24 04:07, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/4/2024 8:39 PM, John Smith wrote:
>>>> On 5/06/24 03:33, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/4/2024 8:20 PM, John Smith wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/06/24 20:02, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> Those words are dead obviously correct about how a partial 
>>>>>>> simulation
>>>>>>> does correctly determine the halt status of this function:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> void Infinite_Recursion2(u32 N)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>      H(Infinite_Recursion2, (ptr)N);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does Infinite_Recursion2 halt?
>>>>>
>>>>> When halting is defined in the software engineering terms of
>>>>> terminating normally then Infinite_Recursion2 does not even
>>>>> halt when it runs out of stack space and crashes.
>>>>
>>>> H always halts, and never runs out of stack space, because it is a 
>>>> decider. How does Infinite_Recursion2 run out of stack space, if H 
>>>> doesn't run out of stack space?
>>>>
>>>
>>> When we are on actual physical machines as my fully operational
>>> HH/DD are running put of stack space is possible.
>>>
>>
>> Then increase the stack space until it doesn't run out. Turing 
>> machines can't run out of stack space unless you programmed them wrong.
> 
> It is fully operational C code it can run out of stack space
> even if you give it googolplex of terabytes.
> 

Sounds like it's infinite recursion. Infinite recursion doesn't halt. 
Deciders always halt, so a program that's infinitely recursive isn't a 
decider.