Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 10/21/2024 5:34 PM, Richard Damon wrote:No, it said that given what you told it (which was a lie) the results were correct. Arguememnts, even if valid, that are based on incorrect premises don't prove anything.On 10/21/24 12:29 PM, olcott wrote:I specifically asked it to verify that its keyOn 10/21/2024 10:17 AM, joes wrote:No, someone using some REAL INTELEGENCE, as opposed to a program using "artificial intelegence" that had been loaded with false premises and other lies.Am Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:41:11 -0500 schrieb olcott:>On 10/21/2024 3:39 AM, joes wrote:>Am Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:36:25 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 10/20/2024 4:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 10/20/24 4:23 PM, olcott wrote:On 10/20/2024 2:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 10/20/24 1:33 PM, olcott wrote:lolwut? A decider is a normal program, and it should be handled likeNote, I DID tell that to Chat GPT, and it agrees that DDD, when theNo one ever bother to notice that (a) A decider cannot have its actual
criteria is what does DDD actually do, which is what the question
MUST be about to be about the Termination or Halting problem, then
DDD WILL HALT since HHH(DDD) will return 0 to it.
self as its input.
every other input.>(b) In the case of the pathological input DDD to emulating terminationDDD *is* the input to HHH.
analyzer HHH the behavior of the directly executed DDD (not an input
to HHH) is different than the behavior of DDD that is an input to HHH.I am not interested in arguing with a chatbot. Make the points yourself.You can click on the link and cut-and-paste the question to see theThe executed DDD calls HHH() and this call returns. The emulated DDDBut whyyy doesn't HHH abort?
calls HHH(DDD) and this call cannot possibly return.
whole answer in compete detail.
>
>
1. **Nature of `DDD()`**:
- `DDD()` simply calls `HHH(DDD)`. It does not perform any additional
operations that could create a loop or prevent it from returning.
- If `HHH` returns (whether by aborting or completing its simulation),
`DDD()` can return to its caller.
>
2. **Behavior of `HHH`**:
- If `HHH` is able to simulate `DDD()` and return, it should report
that `DDD()` terminates. If `HHH` aborts due to detecting non- termination,
it does not reflect the actual execution of `DDD()`; it leads to a
conclusion that may not align with the true behavior.
>
3. **Contradiction in Results**:
- If `HHH` claims that `DDD()` does not halt, but in reality, `DDD()`
can terminate once `HHH` returns, then `HHH` is providing an incorrect
analysis.
- The contradiction lies in the ability of `HHH` to detect non-
termination theoretically while simultaneously allowing `DDD()` to halt in
practical execution.
>
### Conclusion:
Given the nature of `DDD()` and how `HHH` operates, it becomes clear that
`HHH` cannot consistently provide a correct answer about whether `DDD()`
halts. The dynamics of calling and returning create a scenario where the
outcomes conflict. Thus, `HHH` is fundamentally flawed in its role as a
termination analyzer for functions like `DDD()`.
Did ChatGPT generate that?
If it did then I need *ALL the input that caused it to generate that*
>
https://chatgpt.com/share/6709e046-4794-8011-98b7-27066fb49f3e
If you did not start with the basis of this link then you cheated.
>
>
Sorry, you are just showing that you have NO intelegence, and are depending on a program that includes a disclaimed on every page that its answers may have mistakes.
assumption is correct and it did.
Could it be correct for HHH(DDD) to report on the behaviorWhich is only correct if your misdefine what that that means.
of the directly executed DDD()?
https://chatgpt.com/share/67158ec6-3398-8011-98d1-41198baa29f2
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.