Sujet : Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 07. Oct 2024, 23:39:59
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <d25865600e71696fdb84e56ad45fd41a6121331c@i2pn2.org>
References : 1
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 10/7/24 4:29 PM, olcott wrote:
*Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD*
HHH is an emulating termination analyzer that takes the machine
address of DDD as input then emulates the x86 machine language
of DDD until a non-terminating behavior pattern is recognized.
Except their can't be a non-terminating pattern in DDD if that happens, as DDD is terminating.
*HHH recognizes this pattern when HHH emulates itself emulating DDD*
And is wrong for doing so, as HHH by return PROVES that DDD will terminate.
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
Terminating is a property of finite string machine descriptions.
One cannot simply ignore the actual behavior specified by the
finite string such that
And, for the PROGRAM DDD, must include the FULL decription of the HHH that it calls.
Thus, if that is all of the input, you are just proving that you have been lying about working on the Halting problem, as your input ISN'T a sufficient representation of the input.
Thus, your are whole problem is on a false basis.
DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH that can possibly
exist never returns.
No, the Emulation of DDD by each corresponding HHH doesn't reach a final state, but the actual program DDD will return if the HHH it calls aborts it simulation are returns 0.
You are just showing that AGAIN, you don't understand the meaning of the words you are using.
Thus each of these HHH emulators that does return 0 correctly
reports the above non-terminating behavior.
Nope, because by doing so it proves itself wrong, and that you are nothing but a LIAR.
And, you accept that designation, by not even attempting to refute the arguements present, but just repeat your REFUTED claims, proving you have less evidence of your innocence then Donald Trunmp.
*Fully operational software*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm *x86utm operating system*
In other words, you are just proving that
PPPP EEEEE TTTTT EEEEE RRRR
P P E T E R R
P P E T E R R
PPPP EEEEE T EEEEE RRRR
P E T E R R
P E T E R R
P EEEEE T EEEEE R R
OOO L CCC OOO TTTTT TTTTT
O O L C C O O T T
O O L C O O T T
O O L C O O T T
O O L C O O T T
O O L C C O O T T
OOO LLLLL CCC OOO T T
L IIIII EEEEE SSS
L I E S S
L I E S
L I EEEEE SSS
L I E S
L I E S S
LLLLL IIIII EEEEE SSS
AND THINKS THAT IS JUST OK.