Re: Pathological self-reference changes the semantics of the same finite string.

On 8/30/2024 8:22 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-30 12:57:49 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 8/30/2024 3:11 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-29 17:53:44 +0000, olcott said:
>

I just proved that the basic notion of finite strings
having unique meanings independently of their context
is incorrect.

>
The context is the halting problem.

>
The behavior of
the directly executed DDD and executed HHH
is different from the behavior of
the emulated DDD and the emulated HHH

 The correct behaviour is the computation that the user wants to
ask about. If the input string specifies a different behaviour
then the input string is worng, not the behaviour.
 

int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
And in the exact same way Bill wants to get the
sum of 5+6 from sum(3,2).
HHH must use its actual input as its basis
and it not allowed to use anything else.
DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86
language cannot possibly stop running unless aborted and
cannot possibly reach its only final halt state no matter
what HHH does. Therefore DDD never halts even if everyone
in the universe including myself disagrees.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer