Re: Verified facts regarding the software engineering of DDD, HHH, and HHH1 ---

On 10/26/2024 12:35 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 26 Oct 2024 11:25:39 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 10/26/2024 10:52 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/26/24 11:44 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/26/2024 10:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

>
Right, and either it follows the rules of the x86 language and NEVER
stop, or it disobeys the requirements of the x86 language to stop its
emulaiton and return.
>

In other words after all of these years you still don't get this:
     "simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until"
Repetition to help your ADD see what it keeps missing. Repetition to
help your ADD see what it keeps missing. Repetition to help your ADD
see what it keeps missing.

>
But it fails to meet the requirements, because your logic presumes that
HHH will never abort.
>

Not at all. In the hypothetical case where HHH never aborts then DDD
never stops running.

Why hypothetical? The HHH that *this* DDD here calls does abort.
 

*The best selling author of theory of computation textbooks*
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that *its simulated D would never*
     *stop running unless aborted* then
     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer