XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.c++, comp.ai.philosophy
From: polcott333@gmail.com
On 11/4/2025 8:43 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2025-11-05, olcott wrote:
>> On 11/4/2025 7:20 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't really see that PO has declined recently - It seems to me he's
>>> been the way he is for as long as I recall. I would say he's become
>>> markedly ruder of late, though! Maybe that's all related to his LLMs
>>> pandering to his delusions and giving him a renewed confidence.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> news://news.eternal-september.org/20251103195844.661@kylheku.com
>>
>> On 11/3/2025 10:28 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>
>>> How about this minimal viable H:
>>>
>>> #include // C interpreter's own API
>>>
>>> bool H(fptr P)
>>> {
>>> interp *s = interp_init(P);
>>>
>>> for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
>>> if (interp_step(s))
>>> return true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> return false;
>>> }
>>>
>>> H initializes an interpreter for its argument P.
>>> Then it applies a very simple abort logic: it
>>> steps the interpreter state three times. If
>>> during those three steps, P terminates, it returns
>>> true. Otherwise it assumes P is nonterminating and
>>> returns false.
>>>
>>> (Pretend that more complicated abort criteria are there.)
>>>
>>> The interpreter API consists of primitives built
>>> into the system, so it isn't traced.
>>>
>>> So then we have D:
>>>
>>> void D(void)
>>> {
>>> if (H(D)) { for (;;); }
>>> return;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Let's trace H(D). We indicate the simulation levels from 0,
>>> step numbers from 1 within each level, with a bit of indentation
>>> to tell apart the levels:
>>>
>>
>> *This is the part that Kaz does not understand*
>>
>> i == 0 reaches if (interp_step(s))
>> i == 1 reaches if (interp_step(s))
>> i == 2 reaches if (interp_step(s))
>> i == 3 NEVER reaches if (interp_step(s))
>>
>> The whole point is that D simulated by H
>> cannot possbly reach its own simulated
>> "return" statement no matter what H does.
>
> Yes; this doesn't happen while H is running.
>
Then that all by itself conclusively proves that
the input to H(D) specifies non-halting behavior
when halting behavior is stipulated to mean behavior
that cannot possibly reach its own final halt state
as measured by D simulated by H.
Within the 100% perfectly exact meaning of those
words without the tiniest little change
I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT.
--
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)
|
