XPost: sci.math, comp.theory
From: chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com
On 11/26/2025 7:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/26/25 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 11/26/2025 3:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> olcott kirjoitti 26.11.2025 klo 5.17:
>>>> On 11/25/2025 9:09 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/25/2025 8:36 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> None of them ever had the slightest clue about Montague
>>>>>>>> Grammar. Except for one they all had very severe math
>>>>>>>> phobia.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So do you; you are terribly afraid of the mathematical idea that
>>>>>>> simulations that are paused still exist and have future
>>>>>>> states.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not going to discuss your psychotic nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>> In all honesty, you and your therapist /should/ be laser focused on
>>>>> your
>>>>> own psychotic nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>>> You already agreed that I am correct so this subject
>>>>>> is closed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whaaat ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> news://news.eternal-september.org/20251104183329.967@kylheku.com
>>>>>> On 11/4/2025 8:43 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-11-05, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So while H does /something/, no matter what H does,
>>>>>>> that D simulation won't reach the return statement.
>>>>>
>>>>> But we know that. If H is nonreturning, of course D is.
>>>>> Since D calls H(D), D is suspended until H(D) returns,
>>>>> which means forever if H(D) is nonterminating.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no idea what you are trying to milk out of this;
>>>>> it is completely uncontroversial.
>>>>
>>>> I really did figure out how to determine the
>>>> correct halt status that the halting problem's
>>>> counter-example input specifies to it decider.
>>>
>>> The basic halting problem is about Turing machines. A Turing machine
>>> specifies only one bhavour. It does not specify anything else to the
>>> decider. An ambiguous program is outside of the domain of the halting
>>> problem.
>>>
>>
>> That is inaccurate. The halting problem is about
>> behaviors that finite string machine description
>> inputs specify.
>>
>> First you must understand this:
>> *The input to HHH(DD) DOES SPECIFY NON-HALTING BEHAVIOR*
>> *The input to HHH(DD) DOES SPECIFY NON-HALTING BEHAVIOR*
>> *The input to HHH(DD) DOES SPECIFY NON-HALTING BEHAVIOR*
>> *The input to HHH(DD) DOES SPECIFY NON-HALTING BEHAVIOR*
>
> Then why does DD() halt?
>
> It seems your definition of "non-halting" is just a lie.
>
>>
>> Then you can understand this:
>> The halting problem is flat out incorrect when it
>> requires a halt decider to report on anything
>> besides what its actual input actually specifies.
>>
>
> No, you are just showing that you are flat out wrong thinking you can
> change the meaning of the words.
>
> That is the mark of a pathological liar.
>
> The input specifies the behavior of the program when it is run, which is
> halt.
I broke down HHH and DD into a fuzzer. Wrt, if HHH(DD) returns non-zero
it goes into an infinite GOTO loop. We can say this is non-halting. If
HHH(DD) returns zero, DD halts.
___________________________
int DD()
{
10: int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
20: if (Halt_Status)
30: HERE: goto HERE;
40: return Halt_Status;
}
___________________________
DD can not halt as well. It depends on the output from HHH.
___________________________
1 HOME
5 PRINT "HHH"
6 P0 = 0
7 P1 = 0
10 INPUT "Shall DD halt or not? " ; A$
20 IF A$ = "YES" GOTO 666
30 P0 = P0 + 1
40 IF P0 > 0 AND P1 > 0 GOTO 1000
50 GOTO 10
666 PRINT "OK!"
667 P1 = P1 + 1
700 PRINT "NON_HALT P0 = "; P0
710 PRINT "HALT P1 = "; P1
720 IF P0 > 0 AND P1 > 0 GOTO 1000
730 PRINT "ALL PATHS FAILED TO BE HIT!"
740 GOTO 10
1000 REM FIN
1010 PRINT "FIN... All paths hit."
1020 PRINT "NON_HALT P0 = "; P0
1030 PRINT "HALT P1 = "; P1
___________________________
Or an automated version:
____________________________
1 HOME
5 PRINT "ct_dr_fuzz lol. ;^)"
6 P0 = 0
7 P1 = 0
10 REM Fuzzer... ;^)
20 A$ = "NOPE!"
30 IF RND(1) < .5 THEN A$ = "YES"
100 REM INPUT "Shall DD halt or not? " ; A$
110 PRINT "Shall DD halt or not? " ; A$
200 IF A$ = "YES" GOTO 666
300 P0 = P0 + 1
400 IF P0 > 0 AND P1 > 0 GOTO 1000
500 GOTO 10
666 PRINT "OK!"
667 P1 = P1 + 1
700 PRINT "NON_HALT P0 = "; P0
710 PRINT "HALT P1 = "; P1
720 IF P0 > 0 AND P1 > 0 GOTO 1000
730 PRINT "ALL PATHS FAILED TO BE HIT!"
740 GOTO 10
1000 REM FIN
1010 PRINT "FIN... All paths hit."
1020 PRINT "NON_HALT P0 = "; P0
1030 PRINT "HALT P1 = "; P1
____________________________
> You are so stupid you can't understand that meaning.
Strange.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
