Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect

On 10/13/2024 11:34 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:

On 2024-10-12, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/12/2024 11:28 AM, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

On 12.10.2024 11:32, Jan van den Broek wrote:

2024-10-12, Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> schrieb:

On 10/11/2024 7:50 PM, olcott wrote:

>
[Schnipp]
>
As I see it, the main Halting Problem is Olcott not halting.

>
LOL! - A very nice one. Thanks for that. :-)

>
I second that. :^)

>
You're likely thousand-seconding that. The Olcott not halting joke
is many years old now, and will likely come up again.
>
>

 My cancer has gotten worse.
 *ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect*
https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
 I had to dumb this down from the original halting problem
input so that reviewers can verify that HHH is correct
without hardly paying any attention at all:
 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 When HHH is an x86 emulation based termination analyzer
then each DDD emulated by any HHH that it calls never returns.
 Each of the directly executed HHH emulator/analyzers that returns
0 correctly reports the above non-terminating behavior of its input.
 *Fully operational code is here*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
 *Here is the original (not dumbed down) version*
from line 1345 of the above source file
 int DD(int (*x)())
{
   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}