Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method

On 6/30/25 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 22:39:10 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
 

On 6/29/25 3:51 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 15:00:35 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
>

Remember, the simulator must be simulating the INPUT, and thus to go
past the call HHH instruction, the code must be part of the input, and
the input needs to be a constant.

   No. If HHH is simulating DDD then HHH can detect a call to itself being
passed DDD within DDD and can assert at that point that the input is
non-
halting.
>
/Flibble

>
And thus isn't simu;ating THE INPUT, and that the input isn't a PROGRAM.
>
Also, what if DDD is using a copy of HHH, as per the proof program,
which might have variations in the code.
>
Sorry, just shows you don't understand the problem.

 No. A simulator does not have to run a simulation to completion if it can
determine that the input, A PROGRAM, never halts.
 /Flibble

Right, but the program of the input DOES halt.
PO just works off the lie that a correct simulation of the input is different than the direct execution, even though he can't show the instruction actually correctly simulated where they differ, and thus proves he is lying.
The closest he comes is claiming that the simulation of the "Call HHH" must be different when simulated then when executed, as for "some reason" it must be just because otherwise HHH can't do the simulation.
Sorry, not being able to do something doesn't mean you get to redefine it,
You ar4e just showing you are as stupid as he is.