Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 05. Jul 2025, 17:07:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <104bija$1hqln$11@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/5/2025 2:36 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 05.jul.2025 om 00:17 schreef olcott:
On 7/4/2025 3:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/4/25 2:24 PM, olcott wrote:
On 7/4/2025 12:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/4/25 9:32 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/4/2025 8:22 AM, joes wrote:
Am Fri, 04 Jul 2025 07:50:23 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/4/2025 2:35 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-03 12:56:42 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/3/2025 3:57 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-03 02:50:40 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/1/2025 11:37 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:12:48 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/30/25 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>
No. A simulator does not have to run a simulation to completion if
it can determine that the input, A PROGRAM, never halts.
>
If. But here it confuses that with not being able to simulate past the
recursive call.
>
>
It is the correct simulation of the input that
specifies the actual behavior of this input.
>
Right, and that means correctly simulating EVERY instruction that makes up the PROGRAM, which must include the code of *THE* HHH, or you can't "correctly simulate" the call instruction.
>
SIn
>
>
If this simulation cannot simulate past the recursive
call then this correctly simulated input cannot possibly
reach its own correctly simulated final halt state.
>
>
But it can, as the call goes into HHH, and you then just simulate the code of HHH.
>
>
Do you mean like this? (as I have been telling you for three years)
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>
Yes, so where in that trace does HHH's "correct simulation" differ from the exact same simulation generated by HHH1 before HHH aborts?
>
>
>
When we compare DDD emulated by HHH and DDD emulated
by HHH1 SIDE-BY-SIDE. (Mike didn't do it this way).
>
*The difference is when*
HHH begins to simulate itself simulating DDD and
HHH1 NEVER begins to simulate itself simulating DDD.
 No its does the same thing as HHH does: it simulates HHH.
*SIDE-BY-SIDE not top down*
*SIDE-BY-SIDE not top down*
*SIDE-BY-SIDE not top down*
HHH(DDD) Simulates itself simulating DDD.
HHH1(DDD) NEVER simulates itself simulating DDD.
As soon as HHH begins simulating itself simulating
DDD the execution trace of HHH1(DDD) and HHH(DDD)
diverge. HHH aborts its simulation many hundreds
of steps later.

This means that there is no difference in the trace. The are simulating the same input.
So, since the are simulating the same input, the result must be the same if the simulations are correct. If the simulations differ, at least one of the must be incorrect.
 
--
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
26 Jun 25 * Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method102Alan Mackenzie
26 Jun 25 `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method101olcott
27 Jun 25  +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method80olcott
29 Jun 25  i`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method79Mikko
29 Jun15:09  i +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method77olcott
29 Jun20:26  i i+* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method13olcott
30 Jun03:46  i ii+* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method11Richard Damon
30 Jun04:05  i iii`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method10olcott
30 Jun12:28  i iii `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method9Richard Damon
30 Jun18:00  i iii  `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method8olcott
1 Jul02:10  i iii   `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method7Richard Damon
1 Jul02:26  i iii    +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method5olcott
1 Jul12:28  i iii    i`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method4Richard Damon
1 Jul13:07  i iii    i `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method3olcott
2 Jul02:25  i iii    i  +- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Damon
2 Jul21:40  i iii    i  `- Logic proves that Peter Olcott is just a liar.1Richard Damon
2 Jul11:12  i iii    `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Heathfield
30 Jun09:47  i ii`- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Mikko
30 Jun03:39  i i+* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method62Richard Damon
1 Jul02:12  i ii`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method61Richard Damon
1 Jul02:34  i ii +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method8olcott
1 Jul09:28  i ii i+* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method4Fred. Zwarts
1 Jul12:52  i ii ii`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method3olcott
2 Jul02:28  i ii ii +- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Damon
2 Jul09:37  i ii ii `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Fred. Zwarts
1 Jul12:32  i ii i`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method3Richard Damon
1 Jul12:55  i ii i `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method2olcott
2 Jul02:31  i ii i  `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Damon
3 Jul03:50  i ii `* HHH(DDD)==0 is correct52olcott
3 Jul09:57  i ii  +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct34Mikko
3 Jul13:56  i ii  i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct33olcott
3 Jul15:24  i ii  i +- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Richard Damon
4 Jul08:35  i ii  i `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct31Mikko
4 Jul13:50  i ii  i  `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct30olcott
4 Jul14:22  i ii  i   +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct11joes
4 Jul14:32  i ii  i   i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct10olcott
4 Jul18:48  i ii  i   i `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct9Richard Damon
4 Jul19:24  i ii  i   i  `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct8olcott
4 Jul21:33  i ii  i   i   `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct7Richard Damon
4 Jul23:17  i ii  i   i    `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct6olcott
5 Jul08:36  i ii  i   i     +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2Fred. Zwarts
5 Jul17:07  i ii  i   i     i`- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1olcott
5 Jul14:01  i ii  i   i     `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3Richard Damon
5 Jul17:16  i ii  i   i      `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2olcott
6 Jul01:25  i ii  i   i       `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Richard Damon
4 Jul14:23  i ii  i   +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct17Richard Damon
4 Jul15:43  i ii  i   i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct16olcott
4 Jul19:14  i ii  i   i `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct15Richard Damon
4 Jul19:25  i ii  i   i  `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct14olcott
4 Jul21:40  i ii  i   i   `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct13Richard Damon
4 Jul23:24  i ii  i   i    `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct12olcott
5 Jul08:33  i ii  i   i     +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3Fred. Zwarts
5 Jul17:03  i ii  i   i     i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2olcott
6 Jul10:45  i ii  i   i     i `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Fred. Zwarts
5 Jul14:07  i ii  i   i     `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct8Richard Damon
5 Jul17:21  i ii  i   i      `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct7olcott
6 Jul01:36  i ii  i   i       `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct6Richard Damon
6 Jul03:23  i ii  i   i        `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct5olcott
6 Jul03:59  i ii  i   i         `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct4Richard Damon
6 Jul05:06  i ii  i   i          `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3olcott
6 Jul10:40  i ii  i   i           +- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Fred. Zwarts
6 Jul12:48  i ii  i   i           `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Richard Damon
5 Jul09:42  i ii  i   `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Mikko
3 Jul15:16  i ii  `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct17Richard Damon
3 Jul15:39  i ii   `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct16olcott
3 Jul15:50  i ii    `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct15Richard Damon
3 Jul16:17  i ii     `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct14olcott
3 Jul23:59  i ii      +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct5Richard Damon
4 Jul00:15  i ii      i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct4olcott
4 Jul01:22  i ii      i `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3Richard Damon
4 Jul01:36  i ii      i  `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2olcott
4 Jul14:25  i ii      i   `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Richard Damon
4 Jul08:42  i ii      `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct8Mikko
4 Jul13:57  i ii       `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct7olcott
5 Jul08:30  i ii        +* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3Fred. Zwarts
5 Jul16:59  i ii        i`* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2olcott
6 Jul10:19  i ii        i `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Mikko
5 Jul09:44  i ii        `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct3Mikko
5 Jul16:53  i ii         `* Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct2olcott
6 Jul10:35  i ii          `- Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct1Fred. Zwarts
30 Jun09:39  i i`- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Mikko
30 Jun09:28  i `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Mikko
27 Jun 25  `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method20Richard Damon
27 Jun 25   `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method19olcott
27 Jun 25    `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method18Richard Damon
27 Jun 25     +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method12olcott
27 Jun 25     i`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method11Richard Damon
27 Jun 25     i `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method10olcott
27 Jun 25     i  `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method9Richard Damon
27 Jun 25     i   `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method8olcott
27 Jun 25     i    `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method7Richard Damon
27 Jun 25     i     `* ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior6olcott
27 Jun 25     i      +- Re: ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior1Richard Damon
28 Jun 25     i      `* Re: ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior4Richard Damon
28 Jun 25     i       `* Re: ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior3olcott
28 Jun 25     i        `* Re: ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior2Richard Damon
28 Jun 25     i         `- Re: ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Claude all agree the input to HHH(DDD) specifies non-terminating behavior1Richard Damon
27 Jun 25     `* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method5olcott
27 Jun 25      +* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method3Alan Mackenzie
27 Jun 25      i`* Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method2olcott
27 Jun 25      i `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Damon
27 Jun 25      `- Re: ChatGPT agrees that HHH refutes the standard halting problem proof method1Richard Damon

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal