Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals ---PSR---

On 3/7/2025 9:53 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/7/2025 8:44 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/7/2025 9:42 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/7/2025 8:23 PM, dbush wrote:

>
We know termination analyzers don't exist because no algorithm exists that maps the halting function:
>
(<X>,Y) maps to 1 if and only if X(Y) halts when executed directly
(<X>,Y) maps to 0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt when executed directly

>
Yes I did grossly over-estimate you technical knowledge.
Are you a mere troll then?
>

>
That you don't understand that termination analyzers and halt deciders are stipulated to map the halting function is not a rebuttal.

 In computer science, termination analysis is program analysis which attempts
attempts
attempts
attempts
attempts
to determine whether the evaluation of a given program halts for each input.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis

Termination *analysis*, not a termination *analzyer*.  The same page states:
The termination analysis *is even more difficult than the Halting problem*: the termination analysis in the model of Turing machines as the model of programs implementing computable functions would have the goal of deciding whether a given Turing machine is a total Turing machine, and this problem is at level Π 2 0 {\displaystyle \Pi _{2}^{0}} of the arithmetical hierarchy and thus *is strictly more difficult than the Halting problem.*
In any case, the halting function maps your DD to 1 / halting, therefore your HHH does not meet the definition of a halt decider or termination analyzer in general, and specifically for DD.