Re: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see... predict correctly

On 7/31/2024 11:03 PM, wij wrote:

On Wed, 2024-07-31 at 22:51 -0500, olcott wrote:

On 7/31/2024 10:08 PM, wij wrote:

On Tue, 2024-07-30 at 18:50 -0500, olcott wrote:

>
It is not supposed to be a general solution to the halting problem.
it only shows how the "impossible" input is correctly determined
to be non halting.
>

>
But how do you determine it is non-halting?
>
As I know you are even unable to define what 'halt' mean !!!
>

I have done this thousands of times and after someone
has read these thousands of times they say that I never
said it once.
>
void DDD()
{
    HHH(DDD);
    return;
}
>
int main()
{
    HHH(DDD);
}
>
If DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its return instruction then it never halts.
>
>

 That's right, HHH(DDD) as shown should never halt.
 

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
     stop running unless aborted then
     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

But The Halting Problem asks HHH to return 1 or 0 (so to speak, because you
don't know the detail).
 Since HHH does not return 1 or 0 to answer the question, it is not a decider.
You are dealing with POO Problem.
 

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer