Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Halting Problem: What Constitutes Pathological Input
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 20:22:41 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <db8999eda88b9152608e58380b8ef7d00862dbaa@i2pn2.org>
References: <GE4SP.47558$VBab.42930@fx08.ams4>
	<ts5SP.113145$_Npd.41800@fx01.ams4> <vvat0g$vtiu$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvatf3$o4v0$3@dont-email.me> <vvaut0$vtiu$4@dont-email.me>
	<vvav6o$o4v0$4@dont-email.me> <vvb329$15u5b$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvb37g$1451r$1@dont-email.me> <vvb43f$15u5b$4@dont-email.me>
	<vvb4ok$o4v0$9@dont-email.me> <vvb52g$15u5b$6@dont-email.me>
	<vvb5ca$o4v0$10@dont-email.me> <vvb5vp$15u5b$7@dont-email.me>
	<vvb675$o4v0$11@dont-email.me> <vvb9d7$1av94$3@dont-email.me>
	<vvbani$1b6l1$1@dont-email.me> <vvbb6s$1av94$4@dont-email.me>
	<vvbcb3$1b6l1$2@dont-email.me> <vvbe0j$1av94$8@dont-email.me>
	<vvbecc$1b6l1$6@dont-email.me> <vvbhk0$1ijna$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvbjjg$1kegb$1@dont-email.me> <vvbk93$1l4cf$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvbkft$1kegb$4@dont-email.me> <vvbl71$1ljaj$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvbma3$1kegb$5@dont-email.me> <vvbmp0$1ljaj$2@dont-email.me>
	<vvbqd5$1tr5o$1@dont-email.me> <vvbrha$1us1f$1@dont-email.me>
	<b5dffdb99fdbfe0cd74914de4d51abe0aa439e7d@i2pn2.org>
	<vvdj0r$3cbpq$9@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 20:22:41 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3354655"; 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: 3697
Lines: 39

Am Tue, 06 May 2025 13:05:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/6/2025 5:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/5/25 10:18 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/5/2025 8:59 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 5/5/2025 8:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/5/2025 7:49 PM, dbush wrote:

>>>>>>> DO COMPUTE THAT THE INPUT IS NON-HALTING IFF (if and only if) the
>>>>>>> mapping FROM INPUTS IS COMPUTED.
>>>>>> i.e. it is found to map something other than the above function
>>>>>> which is a contradiction.
>>>>> The above function VIOLATES COMPUTER SCIENCE. You make no attempt to
>>>>> show how my claim THAT IT VIOLATES COMPUTER SCIENCE IS INCORRECT you
>>>>> simply take that same quote from a computer science textbook as the
>>>>> infallible word-of-God.
What does it violate?

>>>> All you are doing is showing that you don't understand proof by
>>>> contradiction,
>>> Not at all. The COMPUTER SCIENCE of your requirements IS WRONG!
>> No, YOU don't understand what Computer Science actually is talking
>> about.
> Every function computed by a model of computation must apply a specific
> sequence of steps that are specified by the model to the actual finite
> string input.
You are very confused. An algorithm or program computes a function.

> HHH(DD) must emulate DD according to the rules of the x86 language.
> THIS DOES DERIVE THAT THE CORRECTLY EMULATED DD DOES NOT HALT.
It does derive that, but it is not correct.

> That everyone here thinks that HHH can simply ignore the rules of the
> x86 language and jump over the "call" instruction to the "ret"
> instruction seems quite stupid to me.
No, we think the call should actually be simulated completely, since
we know it returns.

-- 
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.