Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct

Am Fri, 04 Jul 2025 07:50:23 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/4/2025 2:35 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-03 12:56:42 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/3/2025 3:57 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-03 02:50:40 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/1/2025 11:37 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:12:48 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/30/25 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

No. A simulator does not have to run a simulation to completion if
it can determine that the input, A PROGRAM, never halts.

If. But here it confuses that with not being able to simulate past the
recursive call.

That is *not* the actual question.

THe actual question is whatever someone asks.

What is the area of a square circle with a radius of 2?

DDD halts.

HHH(DDD) is asked: Does your input specify a computation that halts*?
DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "return"
statement final halt state, so NO.

*when executed directly, which is what should be simulated. HHH can't.

THat is the same question if the input specifies the computation as
DDD. If it does not then HHH(DDD) is irrelevant and either the user's
manual of HHH species another input for the purpose or HHH is not
relevant to the halting problem.

HHH1(DDD) is asked: Does your input specify a computation that halts?
DDD correctly simulated by HHH1 reaches its own "return" statement
final halt state, so YES.

The user's manual of HHH1 apparently dpecifies different encoding
rules.

The full execution trace of the input to HHH1(DDD) is different than The
full execution trace of the input to HHH(DDD)
because DDD calls HHH in recursive simulation and does not call HHH1 in
recursive simulation.

Uh, the traces both show a call to HHH.

--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.