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: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Overcoming the proof of undecidability of the Halting Problem by a simple example in C Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:09:00 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 59 Message-ID: <1006oac$3l6s6$1@dont-email.me> References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me> <1005la7$3akrk$3@dont-email.me> <1005mms$3akrk$4@dont-email.me> <1005t5g$3chps$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 09:09:01 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1dfa167546830b8917680f44790d20f0"; logging-data="3840902"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX195TFKSJ5K/7thw0jqgP648" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:0GdVMpDyayQKETh7xAeUUCxHKi4= Bytes: 3290 On 2025-05-15 23:25:36 +0000, olcott said: > On 5/15/2025 5:08 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: >> On Thu, 15 May 2025 16:35:24 -0500, olcott wrote: >> >>> On 5/15/2025 4:18 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: >>>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 16:11:35 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 5/15/2025 3:59 PM, Mr Flibble wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 15 May 2025 15:47:16 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I overcome the proof of undecidability of the Halting Problem in >>>>>>> that the code that "does the opposite of whatever value that HHH >>>>>>> returns" becomes unreachable to DD correctly simulated by HHH. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> int DD() >>>>>>> { >>>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD); >>>>>>> if (Halt_Status) >>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>>> return Halt_Status; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to simulate itself again over >>>>>>> and over until HHH sees this repeating pattern and aborts or both >>>>>>> HHH and DD crash due to OOM error. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is not possible for HHH to simulate DD because we are already >>>>>> inside DD when we call HHH: >>>>> >>>>> Since HHH does correctly simulate itself simulating DD we have >>>>> complete proof that you are wrong. >>>>> >>>>> I had to write the whole x86utm operating system to make this work. >>>> >>>> It is not possible to make this work even by "writing an operating >>>> system" >>>> so whatever you think you are doing it isn't addressing my core point: >>>> you are NOT *fully* simulating DD by HHH because you are already inside >>>> DD when you are calling HHH. >>>> >>>> /Flibble >>> >>> Anyone that is intimately familiar with how multi-tasking operating >>> systems work will understand how HHH could emulate itself emulating its >>> input. >> >> What has multi-tasking got to do with it? You are talking out of your >> arse, Peter. :) > > Anyone that is intimately familiar with multi-tasking > operating systems will know the details of how HHH > emulates itself emulating DDD. That is an implementation detail that is not required by the problem. -- Mikko