Path: ...!news.snarked.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly halt (Halting Problem) --- mindless robots Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 06:54:07 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <928ebbd74ed71ad5853dedb8d95db1ce7c3b848d@i2pn2.org> References: <852f89c9196e0261b8156050fea4572fe886933f@i2pn2.org> <63af93cb608258cc3e12b9bab3a2efa0b7ee7eee@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:05:24 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="446610"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3686 Lines: 52 On 4/14/25 11:41 PM, olcott wrote: > On 4/14/2025 8:45 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 15/04/2025 02:18, olcott wrote: >>> On 4/14/2025 7:39 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 14/04/2025 12:56, olcott wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> When people insist that a termination analyzer reports >>>>> on behavior other than the behavior that its finite string >>>>> input specifies this is isomorphic to requiring a perfectly >>>>> geometric square circle in the same two dimensional plane, >>>>> simply logically impossible, thus an incorrect requirement. >>>> >>>> A termination analyzer that works is simply logically impossible, >>>> thus an incorrect requirement. >>>> >>> >>> THAT IS A STUPID THING TO SAY THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES WHAT >>> COMPUTABLE FUNCTIONS ARE AND HOW THEY WORK. >> >> You said precisely the same thing in reply to dbush. I have addressed >> your remark there, so I see no value in repeating my reply here. >> >>> HHH CORRECTLY REPORTS ON THE PATHOLOGICAL SELF-REFERENCE THAT >>> ITS INPUT SPECIFIES. THE DIRECT EXECUTION HAS NO SUCH PSR. >> >> You say so, > > Ignoring verified facts does not make them go away. Right, like the fact that when the exact input given to HHH is correctly, and completely, simulated, it reaches a final state. > >> but as it's you saying it and you can't even turn off CAPS LOCK I see >> no reason to believe that you have the capacity to be right, > > Belief and disbelief are inherently fallible. > Only comprehension ultimately rules. Which you have shown a failure to have. > >> so I think I'll wait until your claim is confirmed by an independent >> observer. >> > > Thus forever postponing the ultimate measure of direct comprehension. > >