Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Liar Paradox

On 3/13/25 12:24 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/12/2025 10:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/12/25 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/12/2025 5:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/12/25 11:37 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/12/2025 4:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 12.mrt.2025 om 03:39 schreef olcott:

On 3/11/2025 9:37 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/11/2025 10:36 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/11/2025 9:32 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/11/2025 10:31 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/11/2025 9:18 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/11/2025 10:06 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/11/2025 9:02 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/11/2025 9:41 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 12/03/2025 01:22, olcott wrote:

DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
own "return" instruction and terminates normally
in any finite or infinite number of correctly
simulated steps.

>
If it correctly simulates infinitely many steps, it doesn't terminate. Look up "infinite".
>
But your task is to decide for /any/ program, not just DDD. That, as you are so fond of saying, is 'stipulated', and you can't get out of it. The whole point of the Entscheidungsproblem is its universality. Ignore that, and you have nothing.
>

>
>
Given that his code has HHH(DD) returning 0,

>
THESE ARE THE WORDS ANYONE THAT DODGES THESE
WORDS WILL BE TAKEN FOR A LIAR
>
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
own "return" instruction and terminates normally
in any finite or infinite number of correctly
simulated steps.
>

>
Changing the input is not allowed.

>
*You are simply lying that any input was ever changed*
>

>
You did precisely that when you hypothesize different code for HHH.
>
Changing the input is not allowed.

>
*THIS IS WHAT MY ORIGINAL WORDS MEANT*
HHH is the infinite set of every possible C function
that correctly emulates N steps of its input where
N any finite positive integer.
>

>
In other words, you're changing the input.
>
Changing the input is not allowed.

>
It is an infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs having the
property that DDD[0] ... DDD[N] never halts.
>

Proving that HHH[0] ... HHH[N} are unable to correctly complete the simulation.

>
void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}
>
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
   return;
}
>
In the exact same way that HHH cannot complete the
simulation of the above functions.
>
BECAUSE THEY SPECIFY NON-TERMINATING BEHAVIOR.
>
>

>
Right, so we can not use the correct simulation BY HHH as the crireria, but it needs to be just the Correct Simulation, which will be the same who-ever does it, so HHH doesn't need to actually do it,
>
Sorry, you are just showing how much your logic is based on FRAUD and LIES.
>
You don't seem to understand that logic based on incorrect premises can't prove anything.

>
By this same reasoning we could determine that the Liar Paradox
is TRUE because it claims to be ~(TRUE) and it <is> ~(TRUE).
>
>

>
So, you admit that you logic is bad?
>

 Just the opposite. I detect and reject the bad logic
caused by pathological self-reference of the Liar Paradox
and defining the halting problem as returning a correct
Boolean value for an input that does the opposite of
whatever value is returned.
 

So you admit that you aren't using the logic defined for the problems, which shows you don't understand what logic is.
Your whole logic is based on you being allowed to LIE about what it true.
Sorry, but you are just showing your utter stupidity,
You haven't shown any logic to be "bad" (except your own) you have shown that you don't understand the meaning of the basic words in logic.
You are just so stupid, you think anything you don't understand, must be wrong, but all that proves is that you yourself are just wrong and too stupid to see it.