Re: Pathological self-reference changes the semantics of the same finite string.

On 8/31/24 11:33 AM, olcott wrote:

On 8/31/2024 10:24 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 31.aug.2024 om 14:26 schreef olcott:

On 8/30/2024 8:22 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-30 12:57:49 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 8/30/2024 3:11 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-29 17:53:44 +0000, olcott said:
>

I just proved that the basic notion of finite strings
having unique meanings independently of their context
is incorrect.

>
The context is the halting problem.

>
The behavior of
the directly executed DDD and executed HHH
is different from the behavior of
the emulated DDD and the emulated HHH

>
The correct behaviour is the computation that the user wants to
ask about. If the input string specifies a different behaviour
then the input string is worng, not the behaviour.
>

>
int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
And in the exact same way Bill wants to get the
sum of 5+6 from sum(3,2).
>
HHH must use its actual input as its basis
and it not allowed to use anything else.

>
HHH is given a finite string of a halting program.

 ARE YOU FREAKING BRAIN DEAD?
 HALTING ONLY MEANS REACHING A FINAL HALT STATE
AND DDD EMULATED BY HHH CANNOT POSSIBLY DO THIS.

But "not/non-halting" is also a technical term that means NEVER reaches a final state, even after an unbounded number of steps.
Halting/Non-Halting is a property only of COMPLETE behavior of an entity.
DDD is NOT "non-halting" just because its simulation was aborted, to be non-halting, the COMPLETE behavior of this exact input (which includes the HHH that it calls) will never reach a final state, but it does, since the complete behavior will see the HHH that DDD calls eventually also deciding, by the exact same conditions, to abort its operation and return to its caller, which will then reach a final state.
The EMULATION didn't reach a final state, but that isn't "non-halting", as that term is reserved in the field for COMPLETE behaviors, but to be correct needs a longer term like not-yet-halted, or a simple didn't reach the final state.
That, or you need to just admit that you aren't working in the field and nothing you say applies, at which point you can make up your own meaning, and reveal how truthful you are by how clearly you define what you are doing.

 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 _DDD()
[00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d         pop ebp
[00002183] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]