XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.c++   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/21/2025 1:18 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   > On 2025-11-21, olcott  wrote:   
   >> On 11/21/2025 11:29 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>> On 2025-11-21, olcott  wrote:   
   >>>> On 11/20/2025 11:04 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>>> No, it states that D would be non-halting in the hypothetical situtation   
   >>>>> in whch H neglected to abort, and just kept simulating.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> HHH has no idea that DD is calling itself, HHH   
   >>>> can only see that DD is calling the same function   
   >>>> twice in sequence with no conditional branch in   
   >>>> DD to stop this from infinitely repeating.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's been explained to you that ths doesn't happen.   
   >>>   
   >>> Any given invocation of DD makes only one call to HHH   
   >>> (as anyone can plainly see from its simple code of several   
   >>> lines!)   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Those double-talk weasel words count as lying within   
   >> the context of this.   
   >>   
   >> int DD()   
   >> {   
   >>     int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);   
   >>     if (Halt_Status)   
   >>       HERE: goto HERE;   
   >>     return Halt_Status;   
   >> }   
   >>   
   >> On 11/20/2025 8:42 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>> On 2025-11-20, olcott  wrote:   
   >>>>    
   >>>>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D   
   >>>>      until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never   
   >>>>      stop running unless aborted then...   
   >>>   
   >>> I also agreed to these words, at least four times.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> The above proves that the input to H(D) does specify   
   >> non-halting behavior.   
   >   
   > All you are communicating is that you have no idea what "prove" means;   
   > where the bar is at for proving something.   
   >   
      
   A proof is ultimately any conclusion derived by   
   applying correct semantic entailment to a   
   self-evidently true basis.   
      
   The semantics of C and the above function are the   
   self-evidently true basis.   
      
   The sequence of steps of DD simulated by HHH according   
   the the semantics of C is the semantic entailment.   
      
   This derives the necessary consequence that DD   
   simulated by HHH would never stop running unless   
   aborted.   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make   
   "true on the basis of meaning" computable.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)