Re: How do simulating termination analyzers work? ---Truth Maker Maximalism FULL_TRACE

Op 05.jul.2025 om 21:34 schreef olcott:

On 7/5/2025 2:07 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

>
You lie.  You don't have a proof.  Many people in this group have pointed
out lots of errors in various versions of your purported proof, which you

 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 *They disagree with this truism* (that seems dishonest)
DDD simulated by HHH according to the semantics of the
C programming language cannot possibly reach its own
simulated "return" instruction final halt state.
 

just ignore.  The section in Professor Linz's book you used to be so fond
of citing will contain plenty of details, if only you would take the
trouble to understand it (assuming you're capable of such understanding).
>

 I have addressed all of those details that you make sure
to ignore so that you can baselessly claim that I am wrong.
 There cannot possibly be *AN ACTUAL INPUT* that does the
opposite of whatever its decider decides. All of the examples
of this have never been *ACTUAL INPUTS*
 No Turing machine can possibly take another directly executing
Turing machine as in input, thus removing these from the
domain of every halt decider.
 *Thus the requirement that HHH report on the behavior*
*of the directly executed DD has always been bogus*
 Turing machine partial halt deciders compute the mapping
from their actual inputs to the actual behavior that these
inputs specify.
 int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
 DD simulated by HHH according to the semantics of the C
programming language cannot possibly halt when halting
is defined as reaching its own simulated "return"
statement final halt state.

Why repeating this failure of HHH to reach the final halt state?
If the simulator has errors which makes it impossible to reach the final halt state of a halting program, that is a property/error of the simulator, not a property of the program specified in the input.
This shows that your definition of 'halting' is incomplete.
You need to add the words 'when not disturbed'.
When a computer is switched of, or a simulation aborted, the program does not reach the final halt state, but it does not make the program non-halting.