Re: Verified facts regarding the software engineering of DDD, HHH, and HHH1 ---

On 10/26/2024 10:52 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/26/24 11:44 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/26/2024 10:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

>
Right, and either it follows the rules of the x86 language and NEVER stop, or it disobeys the requirements of the x86 language to stop its emulaiton and return.
>

>
In other words after all of these years you still don't get this:
    "simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D until"
>
Repetition to help your ADD see what it keeps missing.
Repetition to help your ADD see what it keeps missing.
Repetition to help your ADD see what it keeps missing.

 But it fails to meet the requirements, because your logic presumes that HHH will never abort.
 

Not at all. In the hypothetical case where HHH never
aborts then DDD never stops running.
"would never stop running unless aborted"
"would never stop running unless aborted"
"would never stop running unless aborted"
"would never stop running unless aborted"
*ChatGPT understand this completely*
https://chatgpt.com/share/67158ec6-3398-8011-98d1-41198baa29f2
Your reasoning really is isomorphic to determining that you
never need to ever eat any food on the basis that you know
in advance that after eating food you will no longer need
to eat food after you have eaten.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer