Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!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 17:44:30 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 89 Message-ID: References: <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 17:44:31 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e40aa6d08e0862c6129c85bba1ac1dcb"; logging-data="1904335"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19AlWLjEQbhkmfmXCEp1JSY" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:k7YlYVqDISqwwvdeLrzAXY3MLwg= Content-Language: nl, en-GB In-Reply-To: Bytes: 6594 Op 11.feb.2025 om 17:22 schreef olcott: > On 2/11/2025 10:10 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 11.feb.2025 om 15:38 schreef olcott: >>> On 2/11/2025 1:28 AM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:36:51 -0600 schrieb 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: >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>> It is true as a verified fact and has been pointed out to Olcott >>>>>>>>>> many times, but he refuses to learn. So, again: >>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that main halts, >>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that the input to HHH(main) cannot possibly >>>>>>>>> terminate normally. >>>>>>>> No, the verified fact is that the input can terminatie normally >>>>>>> The directly executed main IS NOT THE INPUT TO HHH. >>>>>>> >>>>>> This main is a program that includes all functions called directly >>>>>> and >>>>>> indirectly, including HHH. >>>>> >>>>> The input to HHH(main) when correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly >>>>> terminate normally. >>> >>>> The input to HHH, which is main(), terminates. HHH does not simulate >>>> that. >>>> >>> >>> The directly executed main() is not the same instance of >>> main() that is input to HHH and simulated by HHH. >>> >>> The directly executed main() relies on HHH aborting >>> the simulation of its input. HHH cannot rely on anything >>> else aborting the simulation of its input. >> >> The simulating HHH should rely on the simulated HHH to abort. > > That cannot possibly work. The executed HHH always sees at least one > more full execution trace than any inner HHH ever sees. > Indeed, that is what I said, but Olcott deleted it in the citation. HHH cannot do what it should do. So, he proves the halting theorem.