Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state ---natural number mapping

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state ---natural number mapping
De : F.Zwarts (at) *nospam* HetNet.nl (Fred. Zwarts)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 13. Aug 2024, 15:49:26
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v9frpn$3u3of$3@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 28
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Op 13.aug.2024 om 14:55 schreef olcott:
On 8/13/2024 2:29 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 12.aug.2024 om 14:42 schreef olcott:
On 8/11/2024 2:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 11.aug.2024 om 13:45 schreef olcott:
>
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
None-the-less it is clear that of the above specified infinite
set DDD correctly emulated by each element of that set never
reaches its own "return" instruction halt state.
>
Since no DDD is correctly simulated by HHH, we are talking about the properties of an empty set.
But, indeed, the simulation of DDD by HHH fails to reach the halt state. It aborts one cycle before the simulated HHH would reach its 'return' instruction, after which DDD would reach its halt state.
>
>
My words must be understandable by ordinary C programmers
and computer scientists. The latter tend to conclude that
my work is incorrect as soon as they know the subject matter
before actually seeing what I said.
>
Every C programmer understands that a simulation fails if it does not reach the end of a halting program.
>
Four expert C programmers (two with masters degrees in
computer science) agree that DDD correctly simulated by
HHH does not halt.
>
Many more experts with master degrees tell you that it does halt.
Show evidence instead of authority.
 *Every attempt at rebutting this has been*
(a) Denying verified facts
(b) Strawman-deception of changing what I said and rebutting that
(c) Pure ad hominem insults with zero reasoning
No evidence, except four unspecified 'experts' against hundreds of other experts.

 Mike is the only one here that seems to have enough technical
skill to understand the verified facts. Everyone else denies them
entirely on the basis of their own ignorance.
 Overview of proof that the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-halting behavior
We prove that the simulation is correct.
You did not. You showed a simulation that fails to reach the end of a halting program. So, the simulation is incomplete and therefore incorrect.

Then we prove that this simulation cannot possibly
reach its final halt state / ever stop running without being aborted.
The semantics of the x86 language conclusive proves this is true.
No proof has been provided.
But the simulation deviated from this semantics, by halting the simulation one cycle before it would halt by its own. Failing to reach the final halt state of a halting program indicates an incorrect simulation.

 Thus when we measure the behavior specified by this finite
string by DDD correctly simulated/emulated by HHH it specifies
non-halting behavior.
 
No it only shows a failed attempt to create a simulating decider.
HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly up to the end.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
2 Aug 24 * Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?395olcott
2 Aug 24 +* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?11Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i`* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?10olcott
3 Aug 24 i `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?9Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i  `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?8olcott
3 Aug 24 i   `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?7Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i    `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?6olcott
3 Aug 24 i     `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?5Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i      `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?4olcott
3 Aug 24 i       `* Re: Olcott is too stupid to know that only the DDD correctly simulated by onlly the HHH that doesn't abort cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?3Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i        `* Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated,by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?2olcott
3 Aug 24 i         `- Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated,by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?1Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 +* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?287Fred. Zwarts
3 Aug 24 i`* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?286olcott
3 Aug 24 i +* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?284Fred. Zwarts
3 Aug 24 i i`* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?283olcott
3 Aug 24 i i +- Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?1Fred. Zwarts
3 Aug 24 i i `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?281Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i  `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?280olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   +* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?278Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i`* Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?277olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?276Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i  `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?275olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?29Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?28olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?27Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i  `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?26olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i   `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?25Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i    `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?24olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i     `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?23Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i      `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?22olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i       `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD21Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i        `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD20olcott
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i         `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD19Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 i i   i   i          `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD18olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i           `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD17Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i            `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD16olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i             `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD15Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i              `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD14olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i               `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD13Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD12olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                 `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD11Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                  `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD10olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                   +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD3Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                   i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD2olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i   i                   i `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD1Richard Damon
5 Aug 24 i i   i   i                   `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD6Mikko
5 Aug 24 i i   i   i                    `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD5olcott
7 Aug 24 i i   i   i                     `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD4Mikko
7 Aug 24 i i   i   i                      `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?3olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i   i                       +- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i   i                       `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Mikko
4 Aug 24 i i   i   `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?245Fred. Zwarts
4 Aug 24 i i   i    `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?244olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i     `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?243Richard Damon
4 Aug 24 i i   i      `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?242olcott
4 Aug 24 i i   i       +- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
5 Aug 24 i i   i       +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?236Mikko
5 Aug 24 i i   i       i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?235olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?25Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?24olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?23Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i  `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?22olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?4wij
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?3olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   i +- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   i `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1wij
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   +- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i   `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?16Mike Terry
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?14olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i+* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?5Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    ii`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?4olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    ii `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?3Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    ii  `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?2olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    ii   `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?8Mike Terry
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?7olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  +* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?5Mike Terry
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  i+* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?3olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  ii`* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?2Mike Terry
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  ii `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1olcott
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  i`- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1olcott
7 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    i  `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
6 Aug 24 i i   i       i i    `- Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i i   i       i `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?209Mikko
7 Aug 24 i i   i       i  `* HHH computes the mapping from its input finite sting to the actual behavior specified by this finite string208olcott
7 Aug 24 i i   i       i   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it206joes
7 Aug 24 i i   i       i   i+* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it204olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii`* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it203Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii `* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state202olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii  `* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state201Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- HHH never reaches its halt state so never decides, or it decides wrong.1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state186olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   +* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   ii   `* Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state2olcott
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   i`- Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it1Mikko
8 Aug 24 i i   i       i   `- Re: HHH computes the mapping from its input finite sting to the actual behavior specified by this finite string (Which is the results of running the input)1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i i   i       `* Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state?4Keith Thompson
4 Aug 24 i i   `- Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?1Fred. Zwarts
3 Aug 24 i `- Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?1Richard Damon
3 Aug 24 `* Re: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?96Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal