XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic   
   From: F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl   
      
   Op 02.aug.2025 om 16:17 schreef olcott:   
   > On 8/2/2025 4:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:   
   >> Op 01.aug.2025 om 16:54 schreef olcott:   
   >>> On 8/1/2025 2:11 AM, joes wrote:   
   >>>> Am Thu, 31 Jul 2025 20:03:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:   
   >>>>> On 7/31/2025 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 7/31/25 8:18 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 7/31/2025 7:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 7/31/25 11:50 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>> And that separate proccess, if left unaborted, would halt. But HHH   
   >>>>>>>> gives up and aborts it, so the process is Halting, not non-halting.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>> But the pattern isn't non-halting by the fact that DDD is shown   
   >>>>>>>> to be   
   >>>>>>>> halting.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>> but since it is only finite recursion of partial simulation, since   
   >>>>>> the   
   >>>>>> first level WILL abort the process and end the recursion.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>> When N instructions of DDD are correctly emulated by every HHH that   
   >>>>>>> can possibly exist (technically this is an infinite set of HHH/DDD   
   >>>>>>> pairs) no emulated DDD can possibly halt and every directly executed   
   >>>>>>> DDD() halts.   
   >>>>>> Wrong, your problem is you forget that all those DDD are different,   
   >>>>> It is an infinite set with every HHH/DDD pair having the same property   
   >>>>> that each DDD cannot possibly halt.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Sure, but what about different HHH_n's simulating the same DDD?   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> _DDD()   
   >>> [00002192] 55         push ebp   
   >>> [00002193] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   
   >>> [00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192  // push DDD   
   >>> [0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2  // call HHH   
   >>> [0000219f] 83c404     add esp,+04   
   >>> [000021a2] 5d         pop ebp   
   >>> [000021a3] c3         ret   
   >>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]   
   >>>   
   >>> Each element of the infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs   
   >>> that emulates a natural number N number of instructions   
   >>> of DDD never halts.   
   >>   
   >> Because HHH aborts prematurely,   
   > Try to prove that and you will find that   
   > your proof is incoherent or has glaring gaps.   
   >   
   That has been proven multiple times, but you close your eyes for it.   
   World class simulators prove that this exact same input specifies a   
   program, that according to the semantics of the x86 language reaches its   
   final halt state in a finite number of steps.   
   We see that HHH follows this correct simulation a few cycles, but then   
   aborts. That is how a premature abort is defined. This bug in HHH makes   
   that it does not see the full specification of the input. That does not   
   change the specification.   
   But HHH has the same attitude: it thinks that what it does not see does   
   not exist.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)