Sujet : Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan --- Ben's agreement
De : F.Zwarts (at) *nospam* HetNet.nl (Fred. Zwarts)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 05. Jul 2024, 17:48:18
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v694k4$3bevk$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
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Op 05.jul.2024 om 16:05 schreef olcott:
On 7/5/2024 8:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 05.jul.2024 om 15:16 schreef olcott:
On 7/5/2024 7:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 05.jul.2024 om 14:19 schreef olcott:
On 7/5/2024 3:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 04.jul.2024 om 22:18 schreef olcott:
On 7/4/2024 3:04 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 04.jul.2024 om 21:45 schreef olcott:
On 7/4/2024 2:40 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 04.jul.2024 om 21:30 schreef olcott:
On 7/4/2024 2:26 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>
I showed that HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself.
>
I proved otherwise, Liar.
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>
No, this trace supports my claim. When we look at this trace we see that
>
HHH is simulating itself simulating DDD until it sees
that DDD is calling HHH in recursive simulation such
that neither the simulated DDD nor the simulated HHH
can possibly stop running unless HHH aborts its DDD.
>
The 'unless HHH aborts ...' is irrelevant and misleading,
>
Not at all. Not in the least little bit.
A halt decider must PREDICT what its input would do.
>
Yes and when it must predict what a simulator that is programmed to abort would do, it should predict that the it will abort and halt. If it predicts something different, then it is incorrect.
If it aborts and ignore that last part of the input, it is incorrect.
>
>
When a bear is running at you to kill you it is not
enough that you only predict that you will shoot the
bear. You must actually shoot the bear or you will be killed.
>
Exactly! Similarly, if a program is programmed to halt, the simulation of it should not only predict that it will halt, but the simulation must actually let it halt, as the simulated program is programmed to do. HHH fails at both. Its prediction is incorrect and its action is incorrect.
>
>
You are either a liar or incompetent
>
I know you have problems recognizing the truth.
>
when correctly emulated by HHH there
>
HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself.
>
LIAR! I give up on you.
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
No need to come back, because you are unable to point to any error in my reasoning. Your replies are only irrelevant, or supporting my reasoning. I showed that HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly and your full trace supports this, as it shows that the simulating HHH is unable to reach the 'ret' of the simulated HHH.
is no "letting" these functions halt.
>
That is indeed the failure of HHH. It cannot do what it must do.
>
>
void Infinite_Loop()
{
HERE: goto HERE;
}
>
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
Infinite_Recursion();
}
>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
}
>
int main()
{
HHH(Infinite_Loop);
HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
HHH(DDD);
}
>
>
>
It seems you do not understand that a finite recursion will end.
>
void Finite_Recursion (int N) {
if (N > 0) Finite_Recursion (N - 1);
}
>
In the same way, DDD, when correctly simulated, will end, as you have shown. Only HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself up to its end. That is why HHH cannot simulate DDD. That is not a property of DDD, but a failure of HHH, which is unable to process the full input and aborts before DDD reaches its end.
>
>
…