Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis

On 2024-11-05 13:18:43 +0000, olcott said:

On 11/5/2024 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-11-03 15:13:56 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 11/3/2024 7:04 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-11-02 12:24:29 +0000, olcott said:
 

HHH does compute the mapping from its input DDD
to the actual behavior that DDD specifies and this
DOES INCLUDE HHH emulating itself emulating DDD.

 Yes but not the particular mapping required by the halting problem.

 Yes it is the particular mapping required by the halting problem.
The exact same process occurs in the Linz proof.

 The halting probelm requires that every halt decider terminates.
If HHH(DDD) terminates so does DDD. The halting problmen requires
that if DDD terminates then HHH(DDD) accepts as halting.

 void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}
 No that is false.
The measure is whether a C function can possibly
reach its "return" instruction final state.

Not in the original problem but the question whether a particular strictly
C function will ever reach its return instruction is equally hard. About
a C function that is not strictly conforming the question may have a
third answer that it may or may not reach its "return" instruction dpending
on the C implementation.
A C function can terminate without reaching its return statement.
The C standard specifies several other possibilities.

Your measure determines that Infinite_Loop() halts.

No, it does not. You should not present claims without justification.
To look like liar is not the best defence against being called a liar.
--
Mikko