Sujet : Re: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 16. Jul 2024, 10:12:05
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <v75a0l$16bjt$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2024-07-15 02:33:28 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/14/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/14/24 9:27 PM, olcott 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.
Excpet, as I have shown, it doesn't.
Your problem is you keep on ILEGALLY changing the input in your argument because you have misdefined what the input is.
_DDD()
[00002163] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
[00002170] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d pop ebp
[00002174] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
The input *is* the machine address of this finite
string of bytes: 558bec6863210000e853f4ffff83c4045dc3
You have already said that a decider is not allowed to answer anything
other than its input. Now you say that the the program at 15c3 is not
a part of the input. Therefore a decider is not allowed consider it
even to the extent to decide whether it ever returns. But without that
knowledge it is not possible to determine whether DDD halts.
-- Mikko