Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 08. Oct 2024, 00:14:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <3cbba2b3005ff5addae239ff5aeb886cbc6cc08e@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 10/7/24 7:02 PM, olcott wrote:
On 10/7/2024 5:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 10/7/24 4:29 PM, olcott wrote:
*Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD*
HHH is an emulating termination analyzer that takes the machine
address of DDD as input then emulates the x86 machine language
of DDD until a non-terminating behavior pattern is recognized.
>
Except their can't be a non-terminating pattern in DDD if that happens, as DDD is terminating.
>
*HHH recognizes this pattern when HHH emulates itself emulating DDD*
>
>
And is wrong for doing so, as HHH by return PROVES that DDD will terminate.
>
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
Terminating is a property of finite string machine descriptions.
One cannot simply ignore the actual behavior specified by the
finite string such that
>
And, for the PROGRAM DDD, must include the FULL decription  of the HHH that it calls.
>
Thus, if that is all of the input, you are just proving that you have been lying about working on the Halting problem, as your input ISN'T a sufficient representation of the input.
>
Thus, your are whole problem is on a false basis.
>
>
DDD emulated by each corresponding HHH that can possibly
exist never returns.
>
No, the Emulation of DDD by each corresponding HHH doesn't reach a final state, but the actual program DDD will return if the HHH it calls aborts it simulation are returns 0.
>
 The finite string input to HHH specifies non-halting behavior.
This is simply over your head.
 
Nope, not if it is actually the description of the program DDD that calls that HHH, since that program halts.

Not because you are not intelligent or educated enough to understand it.
It is because you are so sure that I must be wrong that all of your thinking has been boxed in by this false assumption.
 
Your problem is you just don't understand the meaning of the words you use, and thus you CHANGE their meaning, which is just a form of lying.
You have been instructed in the proper meaning, but ignore it, that means that you have just proven that
PPPP   EEEEE  TTTTT  EEEEE  RRRR
P   P  E        T    E      R   R
P   P  E        T    E      R   R
PPPP   EEEEE    T    EEEEE  RRRR
P      E        T    E      R R
P      E        T    E      R  R
P      EEEEE    T    EEEEE  R   R
  OOO   L       CCC    OOO   TTTTT  TTTTT
O   O  L      C   C  O   O    T      T
O   O  L      C      O   O    T      T
O   O  L      C      O   O    T      T
O   O  L      C      O   O    T      T
O   O  L      C   C  O   O    T      T
  OOO   LLLLL   CCC    OOO     T      T
L     IIIII  EEEEE   SSS
L       I    E      S   S
L       I    E      S
L       I    EEEEE   SSS
L       I    E          S
L       I    E      S   S
LLLLL IIIII  EEEEE   SSS
AND THINKS THAT IS JUST OK.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
7 Oct 24 * Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD8olcott
8 Oct 24 +* Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD3Richard Damon
8 Oct 24 i`* Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD2olcott
8 Oct 24 i `- Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD1Richard Damon
8 Oct 24 `* Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD4Mikko
8 Oct 24  `* Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD3olcott
8 Oct 24   +- Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD1Richard Damon
9 Oct 24   `- Re: Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH(DDD) rejects input DDD1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal