Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH

Op 15.feb.2025 om 00:30 schreef olcott:

On 2/14/2025 6:58 AM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 14 Feb 2025 06:42:29 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/14/2025 3:36 AM, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 13 Feb 2025 18:12:52 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/13/2025 8:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 13.feb.2025 om 13:31 schreef olcott:

On 2/13/2025 3:16 AM, joes wrote:

Am Wed, 12 Feb 2025 22:18:32 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/11/2025 2:05 PM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:19:11 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/11/2025 9:23 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:38:37 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/10/2025 2:48 PM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:46:21 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/10/2025 6:52 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:02:48 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/10/2025 5:16 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:54:39 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/9/2025 1:33 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:04 schreef olcott:

On 2/9/2025 12:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 18:00 schreef olcott:

On 2/9/2025 10:50 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:18 schreef olcott:

On 2/9/2025 2:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:10 schreef olcott:

On 2/8/2025 3:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:47 schreef olcott:

On 2/8/2025 3:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 08.feb.2025 om 06:53 schreef olcott:

On 2/7/2025 7:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 2/7/25 8:12 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/7/2025 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 2/7/25 11:26 AM, olcott wrote:

On 2/7/2025 6:20 AM, Richard Damon
wrote:

On 2/6/25 10:02 PM, olcott wrote:

>

Since there is a 5% chance that the treatment I will have next
month will kill me and this treatment is my only good chance I
will totally ignore anything that diverges from the point.

Ok, I will wait a month then.
>

Anyone that knows the C language sufficiently well knows that DD
correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.

>
Indeed, which shows the limitation of HHH which makes that it cannot
properly decide about its input, because  it must abort the correct
simulation before it sees that the correct simulation terminates
normally.
>

The correct simulation is only the one that it sees by definition. it
maps ITS INPUT TO THE BEHAVIOR OF THIS INPUT.
All of the people that think it should map the behavior of a non- input
have always been wrong.

What is the non-input?

>
int main()
{
    DD();    // Is not an input to HHH
    HHH(DD)  // Is an input to HHH
{

Oh, but we’re not interested in the behaviour of HHH(HHH(DD)).
>

The input is DD, and its behaviour is that it halts.
HHH’s simulation is not correct by definition.

>
DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>

 Proving the failure to decide by simulation.