Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:31:36 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 92 Message-ID: References: <274abb70abec9d461ac3eb34c0980b7421f5fabd@i2pn2.org> <7ad847dee2cf3bc54cddc66a1e521f8a7242c01f@i2pn2.org> <50488790b3d697cccde5689919b1d1d001b01965@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:31:41 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="36334507e537e7a446b2fdddfcc9069f"; logging-data="3055874"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19aOOsZMVBStTMBtEwwtV4b" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:BtURBVY0WuIx1Zjodbrv9OXzWP8= X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250213-4, 2/13/2025), Outbound message Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 7417 On 2/13/2025 3:16 AM, joes wrote: > Am Wed, 12 Feb 2025 22:18:32 -0600 schrieb olcott: >> On 2/11/2025 2:05 PM, joes wrote: >>> Am Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:19:11 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 2/11/2025 9:23 AM, joes wrote: >>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:38:37 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>> On 2/10/2025 2:48 PM, joes wrote: >>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:46:21 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 6:52 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:02:48 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 5:16 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:54:39 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 1:33 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 12:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 18:00 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:50 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:18 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:10 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:47 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 06:53 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 7:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/25 8:12 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/25 11:26 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 6:20 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/25 10:02 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/2025 8:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/25 5:18 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/25 1:26 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/6/2025 10:52 AM, Bonita Montero > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which proves that HHH fails to make a correct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision about DD's halting behaviour. All other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods (direct execution, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation by a world class simulator, etc.) show >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that DD halts. But HHH fails to see it. Everyone with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sufficient understanding of programming sees that HHH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not correctly programmed when it aborts one cycle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the simulation would end normally. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The execution trace only shows that HHH is unable to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complete its simulation, because HHH is unable to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulate itself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It turns out that Olcott does not even understand this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple proof that HHH produces false negatives. HHH is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unable to simulate itself up to the normal termination. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, in other words, Olcott denies verified facts. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH generates false negatives, as is verified in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         int main() { >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>           return HHH(main); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         } >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but he denies it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He lacks the ability to accept simple verified facts, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he tries to hide with a lot of irrelevant words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that main cannot possibly be correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by HHH until its normal termination. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed, which proves that HHH is unable to simulate itself >>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly. >>>>>>>>>>>> If this was true then you could point out exactly where HHH is >>>>>>>>>>>> incorrect. >>>>>>>>>>> HHH is supposed to be a decider, i.e. halt and return the >>>>>>>>>>> correct value. >>>>>>>>>> The directly executed HHH(DD) always halts and returns a correct >>>>>>>>>> value as soon as it correctly determines that its input cannot >>>>>>>>>> possibly terminate normally. >>>>>>>>> We were talking about HHH(HHH). If the outer HHH halts according >>>>>>>>> to spec, so does the inner, because it is the same. Therefore it >>>>>>>>> can’t report „non-halting” and be correct. If the inner HHH >>>>>>>>> doesn’t halt, it is not a decider. >>>> I am not going to ever talk about that. >>> Oh goody, you’re never getting anywhere if you reject corrections. >> I reject infinite deflection away from the point. The absolute >> single-mined focus point is that DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot >> possible terminate normally. > That IS the point. DD does nothing else than call HHH. > >> Since there is a 5% chance that the treatment I will have next month >> will kill me and this treatment is my only good chance I will totally >> ignore anything that diverges from the point. > Ok, I will wait a month then. > Anyone that knows the C language sufficiently well knows that DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer