Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Fred. Zwarts" Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 11:07:34 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 261 Message-ID: References: <6f15178eda69b13fae9cbfef29acad05c9c6aeb3@i2pn2.org> <1454e934b709b66a0cb9de9e9796cb46fed0425c@i2pn2.org> <274abb70abec9d461ac3eb34c0980b7421f5fabd@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 11:07:35 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e40aa6d08e0862c6129c85bba1ac1dcb"; logging-data="1816930"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18eYHHCIBJq855S/MhlADIJ" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:sg1V+mgWpnpiEnuRblkWucjU/xY= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: nl, en-GB Bytes: 14215 Op 10.feb.2025 om 21:36 schreef olcott: > On 2/10/2025 12:41 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 10.feb.2025 om 13:27 schreef olcott: >>> On 2/10/2025 6:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 10.feb.2025 om 12:51 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/10/2025 2:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:54 schreef 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 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.02.2025 um 16:11 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/5/2025 1:44 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 05.02.2025 um 04:38 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This treatment does not typically last >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very long and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be immediately followed by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> riskier fourth line >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of treatment that has an initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success rate much higher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than its non progression mortality rate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halting problem solved ! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The halting problem proof input does >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specify non- halting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior to its decider. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LOOOOOOOOL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone that understands the C programming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sufficiently well (thus not confused by the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unreachable >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "if" statement) correctly understands that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DD simulated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And anyone that understand the halting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem knows that isn't the question being >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asked. The quesiton you NEED to ask is will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the program described by the input halt when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> run? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since you start off with the wrong question, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you logic is just faulty. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone that thinks my question is incorrect >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is wrong. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has always been a mathematical mapping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strings to behaviors. That people do not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehend this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shows the shallowness of the depth of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> learned- by- rote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (lack of) understanding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you are just incorreect as you don't know >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, it is a mapping of the string to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior, and that mapping is DEFINED to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the halting behavior of the program the string >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> describes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No this is incorrect. The input finite string >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (not merely describes) non halting behavior to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its decider. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, since the definition of "Halting Behavior" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the behavior of the progran being run. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It may seem that way to people that have learned- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by- rote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as their only basis. It is actually nothing like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, that *IS* the definition. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A termination analyzer computes the mapping from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strings to the actual behavior that these finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specify. That this is not dead obvious to everyone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merely proves that learned-by-rote does not involve >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual comprehension. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And the behavior the finite string specifies is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of running the program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is verifiably factually incorrect. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The running program has a different execution trace >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the behavior that DD specifies to HHH. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If so, then it proves the failure of the simulation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The simulation aborts too soon on unsound grounds, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cycle before the normal termination of the program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This proves that you simply don't have sufficient >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the C programming language. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a verified fact. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)(); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int DD() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> } ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========