Re: Claude.ai provides reasoning why I may have defeated the conventional HP proof

Op 05.jul.2025 om 00:08 schreef olcott:

On 7/4/2025 3:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/4/25 4:16 PM, olcott wrote:

https://claude.ai/share/48aab578-aec3-44a5-8bb3-6851e0f8b02e
>

>
Since you LIE with the following statement;
>
Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until
it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When
HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation
and returns 0.
>
Since there is no such pattern in the input, since its execution halts,

 Directly executed Turing machines are outside of the
domain of every Turing machine partial halt decider,
thus DDD() does not contradict HHH(DDD)==0.

Irrelevant, because HHH should report on its input. This input includes the abort code and specifies a halting program.
That is proven by direct execution of the same input, but there is no need for the HHH to know about the direct execution.
The direct execution is only a proof of the failure of HHH.

 

since HHH DOES return 0 as you stipulated, this statement is just a lie of asserting the existance of a condition that doesn't exist.
>