Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 12:50:21 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <2dd4a1bd3eb9d1a15bcf362551f52b4343fabd60@i2pn2.org> References: <7ad847dee2cf3bc54cddc66a1e521f8a7242c01f@i2pn2.org> <50488790b3d697cccde5689919b1d1d001b01965@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 12:50:21 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="300144"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM"; User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 6384 Lines: 86 Am Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:21:10 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 2/15/2025 2:06 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 14.feb.2025 om 22:18 schreef olcott: >>> On 2/14/2025 8:01 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 13:48 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/14/2025 3:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 01:12 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/13/2025 8:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 13.feb.2025 om 13:31 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Indeed, which shows the limitation of HHH which makes that it >>>>>>>> cannot properly decide about its input, because  it must abort >>>>>>>> the correct simulation before it sees that the correct simulation >>>>>>>> terminates normally. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> The correct simulation is only the one that it sees by definition. >>>>>>> it maps ITS INPUT TO THE BEHAVIOR OF THIS INPUT. >>>>>> >>>>>> If I close my eyes, so that I do not see the accident, I cannot >>>>>> claim that the accident did not happen. That is the reasoning of a >>>>>> 2 years old child. >>>>> >>>>> HHH(DD) maps the finite string input of DD to the behavior that it >>>>> specifies. This behavior does include DD repeatedly calling HHH(DD) >>>>> in recursive simulation that that cannot possibly terminate >>>>> normally. >>>>> >>>> Olcott is again dreaming of a HHH that does not abort. Dreams are no >>>> substitute for reasoning. >>>> The simulating HHH aborts the simulation, closes its eyes and does >>>> not see that the simulated HHH also aborts so that the program >>>> terminates normally. >>>> >>> It is only your lack of technical competence that makes it seem that >>> (a) The simulated HHH aborts its simulation after itself is no longer >>> being simulated. >>> >>> (b) Either the outermost HHH aborts its simulation of none of them do. >> Which does not change the fact that simulating HHH does not see that >> the simulated HHH would also abort, > > The simulated HHH cannot possibly abort because it can't possibly get to > the point where it sees that it needs to abort because it is aborted > before it gets to this point. Yes, but why does it need to be stopped before it halts? > Unless the outermost HHH aborts before any inner HHH sees that it needs > to abort no HHH ever aborts. True. No HHH should ever abort. -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.