XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 7/28/2025 6:38 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 7/27/25 10:58 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 7/27/2025 9:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 7/27/25 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 7/27/2025 7:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>> On 7/27/25 5:46 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 7/27/2025 4:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 7/27/25 4:28 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 7/27/2025 2:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 7/27/25 9:50 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 7/27/2025 6:11 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/26/25 10:43 PM, olcott wrote:>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> When HHH(DDD) simulates DDD it also simulates itself   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> simulating DDD because DDD calls HHH(DDD).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> But can only do that if HHH is part of its input, or it is   
   >>>>>>>>>>> not simulating its input.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> And, it FAILS at simulating itself, as it concludes that   
   >>>>>>>>>>> HHH(DDD) will never return, when it does.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> This ChatGPT analysis of its input below   
   >>>>>>>>>> correctly derives both of our views. I did   
   >>>>>>>>>> not bias this analysis by telling ChatGPT   
   >>>>>>>>>> what I expect to see.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();   
   >>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> void DDD()   
   >>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);   
   >>>>>>>>>>    return;   
   >>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> int main()   
   >>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);   
   >>>>>>>>>>    DDD();   
   >>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its   
   >>>>>>>>>> input until:   
   >>>>>>>>>> (a) It detects a non-terminating behavior pattern then it   
   >>>>>>>>>> aborts its simulation and returns 0,   
   >>>>>>>>>> (b) Its simulated input reaches its simulated "return"   
   >>>>>>>>>> statement then it returns 1.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/688521d8-e5fc-8011-9d7c-0d77ac83706c   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Just proves that you have contaminated the learning with false   
   >>>>>>>>> idea about programs.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I made sure that ChatGPT isolates this conversation   
   >>>>>>>> from everything else that I ever said. Besides telling   
   >>>>>>>> ChatGPT about the possibility of a simulating termination   
   >>>>>>>> analyzer (that I have proved does work on some inputs)   
   >>>>>>>> it figured out all the rest on its own without any   
   >>>>>>>> prompting from me.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You CAN'T totally isolate it. You can tell it to not use what you   
   >>>>>>> have told it previously (which you did not do),   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ChatGPT remember prior conversations   
   >>>>>> is turned off   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> My Account   
   >>>>>>   Settings   
   >>>>>>    Personalization   
   >>>>>>     Memory   
   >>>>>>      Reference saved memories   
   >>>>>> This is important because I need to know the   
   >>>>>> minimum basis that it needs to understand what   
   >>>>>> I said so that I can know that I have no gaps   
   >>>>>> in my reasoning.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But that setting isn't perfect.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> but anything said to the AI, has a chance of being recorded and   
   >>>>>>> used for future training.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> During periodic updates.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And you have been posting your lies on usenet, which is a source of   
   >>>>> training, for awhile.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Just think, you might be the one responsible for providing the   
   >>>>>>> lies that future AIs have decided to accept ruining the chance of   
   >>>>>>> some future breakthrough.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The above input that I provided has zero falsehoods.   
   >>>>>> ChatGPT figured out all of the reasoning from that   
   >>>>>> basis.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But. not full definitions, like the fact that a given program on a   
   >>>>> given input will always do the same thing.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When DDD is emulated by HHH it must emulate   
   >>>> DDD calling itself in recursive emulation.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When DDD is emulated by HHH1 it need not emulate   
   >>>> itself at all.   
   >>>   
   >>> But "itself" doesn't matter to x86 instructions,   
   >> By itself I mean the exact same machine code bytes   
   >> at the exact same machine address.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Which doesn't affect the behavior of those bytes.   
   >   
      
   void DDD()   
   {   
      HHH(DDD);   
      return;   
   }   
      
   That you are too stupid to understand that DDD simulated   
   by HHH does call HHH in recursive emulation even after   
   I have provided fully operational code of DDD calling   
   HHH(DDD) in recursive emulation *IS NOT A REBUTTAL*   
      
   https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius   
   hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)