Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: dbush Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: Everyone on this forum besides Keith has been a damned liar about this point Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 12:43:57 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 86 Message-ID: <102730d$ipgg$5@dont-email.me> References: <1025i6j$afk6$1@dont-email.me> <1025j6l$4nm5$1@dont-email.me> <1025jn5$aqju$1@dont-email.me> <1025kkk$4nm5$2@dont-email.me> <1025l2e$aqju$3@dont-email.me> <1025l7l$4nm5$3@dont-email.me> <1025n51$b964$2@dont-email.me> <1026i2q$h686$1@dont-email.me> <1026slo$j3rp$6@dont-email.me> <1026ta5$ipgg$1@dont-email.me> <1026ukn$k2tr$1@dont-email.me> <1026uuj$ipgg$2@dont-email.me> <1026vqt$kb6a$1@dont-email.me> <102703a$kcea$1@dont-email.me> <10270q6$ki5i$1@dont-email.me> <102715d$ipgg$3@dont-email.me> <10271sq$ki5i$2@dont-email.me> <10272c7$ipgg$4@dont-email.me> <10272o6$kt3u$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2025 18:43:57 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="83f8099c26aa018e5abc55e668b658fc"; logging-data="615952"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18i10BGBapdIOERQtclLnbC" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:62YLgJDpiYbQ2EwQsOTU3EzqFGI= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <10272o6$kt3u$1@dont-email.me> On 6/9/2025 12:39 PM, olcott wrote: > On 6/9/2025 11:33 AM, dbush wrote: >> On 6/9/2025 12:24 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 6/9/2025 11:12 AM, dbush wrote: >> And since your reasoning is that the input to HHH(DDD) only includes >> the code of the function DDD as you've stated below, > > *In other words you are too stupid to understand this* > > void DDD() > { >   HHH(DDD); >   return; > } > > The *input* to simulating termination analyzer HHH(DDD) Only includes the code of the function DDD, as you have admitted on the record, meaning your HHH isn't working with algorithms (or their description/specification) and therefore has nothing to do with the halting problem. If you would just be honest about that you might actually be taken seriously. On 5/13/2025 9:54 PM, dbush wrote: > On 5/13/2025 9:48 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 5/13/2025 8:31 PM, dbush wrote: >>> On 5/13/2025 9:27 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/13/2025 8:07 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>> On 5/13/2025 5:30 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 5/13/2025 6:43 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/13/25 12:52 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> *simulated D would never stop running unless aborted* >>>>>>>> or they themselves could become non-terminating. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But you aren't simulating the same PROGRAM D that the original >>>>>>> was given. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It is not supposed to be the same program. >>>>> >>>>> So you *explicitly* admit to changing the input. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The finite string of DD is specific sequence bytes. >>> >>> Which includes the specific sequence of bytes that is the finite >>> string HHH >>> >> >> No it does not. A function calls is not macro inclusion. >> > > Then you admit that your HHH not deciding about algorithms and therefore > has nothing to do with the halting problem. > On 6/7/2025 10:56 AM, dbush wrote: > On 6/7/2025 10:54 AM, olcott wrote: >> On 6/7/2025 9:51 AM, dbush wrote: >>> On 6/7/2025 10:32 AM, olcott wrote: >>>> The next instruction of DDD that HHH emulates is at >>>> the machine address of 00002183. >>>> >>>> The next instruction of DDD that HHH1 emulates is at >>>> the machine address of 00002190. >>> >>> False. >>> >>> The next instruction of DDD that both HHH and HHH1 emulates is at the >>> machine address of 000015c3, >> >> *That is not an instruction of DDD* >> *That is not an instruction of DDD* >> *That is not an instruction of DDD* >> *That is not an instruction of DDD* > > In other words, you're not operating on algorithms. And since the > halting problem is about algorithms, what you're working on has nothing > to do with the halting problem. > > If you would just be honest about the fact that you're not working on > the halting problem, people would stop bothering you.