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: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 08:46:17 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 253 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 15:46:21 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2bd46967c94f87f70aef9b09a146468d"; logging-data="1918043"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IYaYYU+u6RO6aKfujaNNU" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:WrMgjPO6Ip05akNpLbuiXlTC14s= X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250210-8, 2/10/2025), Outbound message Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 14241 On 2/11/2025 4:07 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > 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) ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========