Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?

On 5/15/25 10:53 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/15/2025 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-05-15 01:30:08 +0000, olcott said:
>

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
int main()
{
   DDD();
}
>
If HHH cannot report on the behavior of its caller
because this is a ridiculous requirement then how
can HHH report on the direct execution of DDD()
(AKA its caller).

>
Your HHH can use all information that Flibble's decider can. Flibble's
decider can determine and report that DDD halts.
>

 I asked you (not Flibble) to show exactly how the requirement
that HHH report on the direct execution of DDD()
[that requires HHH to report on the behavior of its caller]
is not nonsense.
 I presume that you dodge because you already know that
it is nonsense yet want to remain disagreeable anyway.
 

How can it be nonsense? It is an objective question with an actual answer, at least it is if HHH is an actual program and DDD is the progrma built by the template of the proof (and thus includes a copy of HHH as part of *IT*).
You question is sort of like complaining when someone asks you for the sum of 2 and 3, and you come back "2 what?, how can I answer about something that abstract.
Or How far away is the moon? And the answer is I can't get there to streach the measuring tape to get the distance.
Programs can be run, and that behavior is fully defined. You can only ask about the direct execution of Programs, as incomplete fragments don't have behavior due to the missing part. So, the question if completely proper, when the input is a program, and thus is the DDD above that includes the code for the particular HHH that it is built on, which WILL be the HHH that you claim is answerig correctly to be the "pathological proof program". Since you claim that HHH will "correctly" return 0, we can by inspection (or detailed simulation) see that DD will call HHH(DD) which will return 0 (by your stipulation, that is what the code does) and then DD will halt.
Thus, you are just proving yourself to be a liar.