Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of the halting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)

On 12/5/2024 11:20 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:

Am 05.12.2024 um 05:20 schrieb olcott:

There is an 80% chance that I will be alive in one month.
There may be an extended pause in my comments.
I will try to bring a computer to the out of town hospital.

 Maybe you'll solve your halting problem issues before you die.
 

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
int main()
{
   HHH(DD);
}
I am sure that DD correctly emulated by HHH according to
the semantics of the C programming language cannot possibly
reach its own return instruction final halt state.
When HHH reports on this behavior of its actual input
it is necessarily correct to reject DD as non halting.
DD emulated by HHH remains stuck in recursive simulation.
Everyone seems to be in universal agreement that HHH
is supposed to report on the behavior of a non-input
except for theory of computation professor Sipser of MIT.
Thus Professor Hehner derived the essence of this halt status criteria:
This algorithm is used by all the simulating termination analyzers:
<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>
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer