Sujet : Re: Computable Functions --- finite string transformation rules
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 25. Apr 2025, 03:50:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vueta8$31sno$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 4/24/2025 6:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 4/24/25 3:41 PM, olcott wrote:
On 4/24/2025 2:12 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 24.apr.2025 om 19:13 schreef olcott:
>
HHH correctly determines through mathematical induction that
DD emulated by HHH (according to the finite string transformations
specified by the x86 language) cannot possibly reach its final
halt state in an infinite number of steps.
>
No, HHH has a bug which makes that it fails to see that there is only a finite recursion,
>
*You are technically incompetent on this point*
When the finite string transformation rules of the
x86 language are applied to the input to HHH(DD)
THIS DD CANNOT POSSIBLY REACH ITS FINAL HALT STATE
not even after an infinite number of emulated steps.
When the defined finite string trasnsformation rules, thos of the x86 language, are applied to this input, completed with the definitions from Halt7.c as stipulated, we see that DD calls HHH(DD), that it will spend some time emulating DDm then it will
Correctly determine that DD emulated by HHH can never possibly
reach its final halt state even after an infinite number of
steps are emulated. Many C programmers have attested to this.
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
When the smart knowledgeable people here disagree it seems
far too implausible to construe this as any honest mistake.
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…