XPost: comp.theory
From: dbush.mobile@gmail.com
On 10/27/2025 8:29 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/27/2025 7:23 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> On 2025-10-27, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/27/2025 3:48 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>> On 2025-10-27, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> I am only referring to these fifteen lines
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A straight forward sequence of steps that any
>>>>>> C programmer can easily determine:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int D()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> int Halt_Status = H(D);
>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you have nothing as this is incomplete and cannot be run.
>>>
>>> This proves the general idea regardless of the
>>> implementation details of any specific instance.
>>
>> OK, so you are saying you no longer have a viable, discussion-worthy
>> instance?
>>
>> Oopsies, if so!
>>
>
> Sure I do
Then you know that Kaz's code shows that HHH isn't correct as you've
admitted on the record:
On 10/26/2025 9:38 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 10/26/2025 9:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/26/2025 8:28 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 10/26/2025 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/26/2025 8:16 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>
>>>> int DD()
>>>> {
>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> HHH(DD) simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to do this
>>>> again and again until HHH figures out what is up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> And HHH figures it out incorrectly as proven by the code posted by
Katz.
>>>
>>
>> You can't even get his name correctly deep ship!
>> (A less contentious way of say dip shit).
>>> If you disagree, point out exactly where Kaz's code is in error.
>>>
>>> Failure to do so in your next reply or within one hour of your next
>>> post in this newsgroup will be taken as your official on-the-record
>>> admission that Kaz's code conclusively proves that the DD that HHH
>>> simulates will halt when simulated enough steps and therefore that
>>> the input to HHH(DD) specifies a halting computation.
>
> Let the record show that Peter Olcott made no attempt to show how the
> code posted by Kaz proves that the DDD that HHH simulates will halt.
> Therefore:
>
> Let The Record Show
>
> That Peter Olcott
>
> Has *officially* admitted:
>
> That Kaz's code conclusively proves that the DD that HHH simulates will
> halt when simulated enough steps and therefore that the input to HHH(DD)
> specifies a halting computation.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
