Re: Halting Problem: What Constitutes Pathological Input

On 07/05/2025 14:22, olcott wrote:

On 5/7/2025 1:18 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

<snip>

There's also an important difference between claiming that Mike's claim is counter-factual and /proving/ that his claim is counter-factual.

 int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}

Yeah, you keep posting that, as if it had some kind of persuasive power.
It doesn't.

The reason that I get angry is that everyone here
has denied that verified fact for three years.

I'm sure you have verified it entirely to your own satisfaction, but until you can find a way of verifying it to /other people's/ satisfaction, you're stuck.
Constant repetition won't do it.
In mathematics, there's generally more than one way to express the truth. (There are at least 350 proofs for Pythagoras's Theorem, for example.) Find a different way to explain your claim, because the way you've chosen doesn't persuade anyone.

Can it really be true that most people here don't
hardly have any clue about actual programming?

No, I don't think so. I think it's far more likely that you have committed yourself to supporting a false claim, and that everyone else can see something that your blinkers won't let you see.

Mike says he's posted evidence in support of his claim. I haven't seen it, but of the two of you I will unhesitatingly take his word for it rather than yours. Have you posted a rebuttal? If not, why not?
>

 The rebuttal is that
Even the simple code shown above proves that DD
correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its
own halt state.

I'm not persuaded.

I never take anyone's word, not even my doctor's word.

That must make life very tedious for you.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within