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: wij Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD) Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 01:21:18 +0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 164 Message-ID: References: <088556c03067d8de7184bf88dd01cc6b8c99ba1b.camel@gmail.com> <09cea75db07408dc9203aca3fb74408ad3a095b4.camel@gmail.com> <853816e160c7b3fe75c71f0728e72989d9fb2e41.camel@gmail.com> <41e08841caf0d628beb5105bc78531a412eea440.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 19:21:19 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1aa223d640888d616762f0efff606324"; logging-data="590366"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/FKPbtVAJ7RU3ZBD0ZwHjg" User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41) Cancel-Lock: sha1:y4hoR74D25wCrYBQrkO71JQjMS0= In-Reply-To: Bytes: 8975 On Sun, 2025-05-11 at 12:00 -0500, olcott wrote: > On 5/11/2025 11:28 AM, wij wrote: > > On Sun, 2025-05-11 at 10:38 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > On 5/11/2025 9:34 AM, wij wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 21:19 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > > > On 5/10/2025 9:09 PM, wij wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 20:56 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 8:44 PM, wij wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 20:26 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 8:17 PM, wij wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 17:03 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 4:44 PM, wij wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 14:29 -0500, olcott wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/2025 2:02 PM, wij wrote: > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > > You don't know the counter example in the HP proof, you= r D is not the case what HP > > > > > > > > > > says. > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > Sure I do this is it! (as correctly encoded in C) > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > typedef void (*ptr)(); > > > > > > > > > int HHH(ptr P); > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > int DD() > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 int Halt_Status =3D = HHH(DD); > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (Halt_Status) > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 HERE: go= to HERE; > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return Halt_Status; > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > int main() > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 HHH(DD); > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > Try to convert it to TM language to know you know nothing. > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > I spent 22 years on this. I started with the Linz text > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > When =C4=A4 is applied to =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > > > > > =C4=A4.q0 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* embedded_H =E2= =9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* =C4=A4.qy =E2=88= =9E > > > > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 or > > > > > > > =C4=A4.q0 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* embedded_H =E2= =9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* =C4=A4.qn > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > (a) =C4=A4 copies its input =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > > > > > (b) =C4=A4 invokes embedded_H =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F= =A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > > > > > (c) embedded_H simulates =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8= =C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 ... > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > Thus =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 correc= tly simulated by embedded_H > > > > > > > cannot possibly reach its simulated final halt state > > > > > > > =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4.qn=E2=9F=A9 > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > To refute the HP, you need to understand what it exactly me= ans in TM. > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > I have known this for 22 years. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > A working TM.=C2=A0Build it explicitly from transition function= , then explain > > > > > > your derivation. You know nothing. > > > > > >=20 > > > > >=20 > > > > > That would be like examining how an operating system > > > > > works entirely from its machine code. > > > >=20 > > > > You are refuting a CS foundamental theorem (i.e. HP) officially. > > > > So, yes, and actually MORE need to be done (beyond your imagination= ). > > > >=20 > > > > Knowing a car or smart phone,... is far different from making one. > > > > Knowing E=3Dmc^2 is far from knowing relativity, making A-bomb (act= ually, making > > > > A-bomb don't need to know E=3Dmc^2, people are often fooled by popu= lar saying) > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=20 > > > > Every chapter of Linz's book, C text textbook has exercises, you ne= ed to those > > > > exercises AT LEAST to comment CS (and computation theory is more ad= vanced topic > > > > than TM). Saying so is because we know you can't do the exercise an= d boast lots > > > > about TM stuff (and pretty much anything else from just reading wor= ds), even > > > > about theorem. > > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > When =C4=A4 is applied to =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > =C4=A4.q0 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* embedded_H =E2=9F=A8=C4= =A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* =C4=A4.qy =E2=88=9E > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 or > > > =C4=A4.q0 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* embedded_H =E2=9F=A8=C4= =A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=8A=A2* =C4=A4.qn > > >=20 > > > (a) =C4=A4 copies its input =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > (b) =C4=A4 invokes embedded_H =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4= =A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > (c) embedded_H simulates =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2= =9F=A9 > > >=20 > > > All that I need to know is that I proved that > > > embedded_H correctly recognizes the repeating > > > pattern where its correctly simulated =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F= =A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 > > > cannot possibly reach its own simulated final > > > halt state of =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4.qn=E2=9F=A9 > > >=20 > > > https://www.liarparadox.org/Linz_Proof.pdf > > >=20 > > > > > We only have to actually know one detail: > > > > > Every counter-example input encoded in any model > > > > > of computation always specifies recursive simulation > > > > > that never halts to its corresponding simulating > > > > > termination analyzer. > > > >=20 > > > > More example here that you don't understand nearly all CS terms. > > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > Mere empty rhetoric entirely bereft of any supporting > > > reasoning. The x86 language is comparable to a RASP > > > machine that is equivalent to a Turing machine. > >=20 > > Question: > > 1. Do you understand that you can't do the exercises in Linz's book? >=20 > Everything is 100% irrelevant besides the fact that > I have shown that =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9 corre= ctly simulated by > embedded_H cannot possibly reach its own simulated > final halt state =E2=9F=A8=C4=A4.qn=E2=9F=A9. Thus when embedded_H report= s > on the behavior that its input specifies it can > correctly transition to =C4=A4.qn. >=20 > > 2. Do you understand your ability of C/assembly/TM is less than 1 year = CS level? > >=20 >=20 > I construe C as high level assembly language thus > disregard any inessentials. No change since K & R > is of any use to me. I write C++ the same way. I > use it as C with classes. I also use std::vector a lot. Q3. If people know the capability of the author of POOH is less than 1 year= CS ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========