Re: Computable Functions --- finite string transformation rules

On 4/24/2025 6:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 4/24/25 5:01 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/24/2025 2:59 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 24.apr.2025 om 21:41 schreef olcott:

On 4/24/2025 2:12 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 24.apr.2025 om 19:13 schreef olcott:

>
HHH correctly determines through mathematical induction that
DD emulated by HHH (according to the finite string transformations
specified by the x86 language) cannot possibly reach its final
halt state in an infinite number of steps.

>

No, HHH has a bug which makes that it fails to see that there is only a finite recursion,

>
*You are technically incompetent on this point*
When the finite string transformation rules of the
x86 language are applied to the input to HHH(DD)
THIS DD CANNOT POSSIBLY REACH ITS FINAL HALT STATE
not even after an infinite number of emulated steps.
>
int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
>
_DD()
[00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002136] 51         push ecx      ; make space for local
[00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD
[0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD)
[00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
[00002147] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
[0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f
[0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d
[0000214f] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
[00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
[00002154] 5d         pop ebp
[00002155] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155]
>
>
>

Again a lot of text, but no rebuttal.

>
*This rebuttal is over-your-head*
>
All computations must be finite string transformations
to finite string inputs.

  Right

>
When the finite string transformation rules of the
x86 language are applied to the input to HHH(DD)
THIS DD CANNOT POSSIBLY REACH ITS FINAL HALT STATE
not even after an infinite number of emulated steps.
>

 No, HHH just stops performing those before it get to the end.
 The transformation, which by definition of the x86 language, don't just stop in the middle, continue to the point where the emulated HHH aborts its emulation and returns 0 to the emulated DD which the halts.

Mathematical induction proves that DD emulated by HHH
cannot possibly reach its own final state in an infinite
number of steps and it does this with one recursive emulation.
There is a repeating pattern that every C programmer can see.

 That fact you confuse the partial emulation of HHH with the actual factual definition of the x86 language just shows your ignorance of what you talk about, that you don't understand the nature of logic or truth, and that you are nothing but a pathological liar.

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer