Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V2

On 7/15/24 11:52 AM, olcott wrote:

On 7/15/2024 9:04 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 07:23:57 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/15/2024 3:59 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 14 Jul 2024 22:35:03 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/14/2024 10:02 PM, Mike Terry wrote:

>

Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination of
simulating termination analyzer HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
behavior or it would never need to be aborted.

It's just that the input HHH halts and does not need to be aborted.

At the point that it is aborted it did need to be aborted

Because it hadn't halted yet?

 Because HHH has seen a repeating state that proves that DDD
correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly ever stop running
unless aborted.

No, HHH *THINKS* it has seen repeating state because is has the wrong model for the HHH that it chose not to emulate (and thus HHH fails to emulate correctly). It is a DIFFERENT DDD that is built on a DIFFERENT HHH whose correct semulation never stops, of DDD is just not a program at all and you whole system is just a LIE.
Remember, programs constain ALL their code, including everything they call, like HHH.

 That you fail to understand a that there is a repeating state
or fail to understand that a repeating state proves this is
less than no rebuttal at all.
 

Why should it have halted, it will do so
in the future. Do you place arbitrary lifetime limits on all programs?
>