Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Truthmaker Maximalism

On 3/14/2025 11:01 AM, wij wrote:

On Fri, 2025-03-14 at 10:51 -0500, olcott wrote:

On 3/14/2025 10:04 AM, wij wrote:

On Fri, 2025-03-14 at 09:35 -0500, olcott wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem In computability
theory, the halting problem is the problem of determining, from a
description of an arbitrary computer program and an input, whether
the program will finish running, or continue to run forever.
That means: H(D)=1 if D() halts and H(D)=0 if D() does not halt.
But, it seems you don't understand English, as least as my level,
....
>

The only difference between HHH and HHH1 is that they are at different
locations in memory. DDD simulated by HHH1 has identical behavior to
DDD() directly executed in main().
The semantics of the finite string input DDD to HHH specifies that it
will continue to call HHH(DDD) in recursive simulation.
The semantics of the finite string input DDD to HHH1 specifies to
simulate to DDD exactly once.
When HHH(DDD) reports on the behavior that its input finite string
specifies it can only correctly report non-halting.
When HHH(DDD) is required to report on behavior other than the
behavior that its finite string specifies HHH is not a decider thus
not a halt decider.
All deciders are required to compute the mapping from their input
finite string to the semantic or syntactic property that this string
specifies. Deciders return true when this string specifies this
property otherwise they return false.
>

Are you solving The Halting Problem or not? Yes or No.
 

I have only correctly refuted the conventional halting problem proof.

Actually solving the halting problem requires a program that is ALL
KNOWING thus God like.