Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 15. Jun 2025, 15:51:30
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <102mmli$uef9$10@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 6/15/2025 4:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-06-14 13:53:01 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/14/2025 6:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-06-13 15:22:04 +0000, olcott said:
>
On 6/13/2025 5:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-06-12 15:34:01 +0000, olcott said:
>
int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
>
It is a verified fact that DD() *is* one of the forms
of the counter-example input as such an input would
be encoded in C. Christopher Strachey wrote his in CPL.
>
// rec routine P
//   §L :if T[P] go to L
//     Return §
// https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article/7/4/313/354243
void Strachey_P()
{
   L: if (HHH(Strachey_P)) goto L;
   return;
}
>
https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-abstract/7/4/313/354243? redirectedFrom=fulltext
>
It *is* a verified fact DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot
possibly reach its own "return" statement final halt state
because the input to HHH(DD) specifies recursive simulation.
>
False. It is not the reursive simulation that prevents the reaching
the simulation of the "return" statement. Instead, previention is
a consequence of the discontinuation of the simulation that the
input specifies.
>
When you try to prove this by providing ALL of the
details you will find that you are incorrect.
>
I don't need to prove anything. It is sufficient to point out that
you have not proven anything. For this discussion a sufficient
proof that HHH aborts is simulation is that you have said it does.
>
This code proves everything that I claimed beyond all possible doubt
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
 More importantly, it proves what I climed: HHH does abort its simulation.
 
*Just like it is required to do*
<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 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
12 Jun 25 * HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT24olcott
12 Jun 25 +* Re: HHH(DD) INcorrectly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT11Richard Damon
13 Jun 25 i`* Re: HHH(DD) INcorrectly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT10olcott
13 Jun 25 i `* Re: HHH(DD) INcorrectly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT9Richard Damon
13 Jun 25 i  `* Re: HHH(DD) INcorrectly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT8olcott
14 Jun 25 i   `* Re: HHH(DD) correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT7olcott
14 Jun 25 i    `* Re: HHH(DD) correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT6Richard Damon
14 Jun 25 i     `* Re: HHH(DD) Does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT5olcott
14 Jun 25 i      +- Re: HHH(DD) Does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT1Fred. Zwarts
14 Jun 25 i      `* Re: HHH(DD) Does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT3Richard Damon
14 Jun 25 i       `* Re: HHH(DD) Does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++2olcott
14 Jun 25 i        `- Re: HHH(DD) Does incorrectly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++ and Oclotts VERIFIED LIES1Richard Damon
13 Jun 25 `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT12Mikko
13 Jun 25  `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT11olcott
14 Jun 25   +- Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT1Fred. Zwarts
14 Jun 25   `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT9Mikko
14 Jun 25    `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++8olcott
14 Jun 25     +* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++2Mike Terry
14 Jun 25     i`- Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++ Mike1olcott
14 Jun 25     +- Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++1Richard Damon
15 Jun 25     `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++4Mikko
15 Jun 25      `* Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++3olcott
15 Jun 25       +- Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++1Richard Damon
16 Jun 25       `- Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT +++1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal