XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, comp.lang.prolog   
   XPost: sci.lang, comp.software-eng   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 2/5/2026 10:36 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   > On 2/5/26 8:31 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 2/5/2026 10:15 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>> On 2/5/26 8:08 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 2/5/2026 9:23 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2/5/26 7:11 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2/5/2026 8:49 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 2/5/26 12:20 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 2/5/2026 12:06 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 2/4/26 7:04 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/2026 8:52 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/26 6:50 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/2026 8:42 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/26 4:00 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/2026 5:43 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/26 2:27 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/2026 4:19 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/26 2:15 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/2026 2:41 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/1/26 9:35 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/1/2026 6:11 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/31/26 12:49 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source code of fully operational system   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halt7.c   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int DD()   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH simulates DD step-by-step according to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the semantics of the C programming language.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IT CAN'T, as you have been told, as your above   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> program, without the C CODE for HHH, has undefined   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior by the semantics of the C programming   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH as executed by polcott is exhibiting a classifier   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interface i'm calling a *partial recognizer*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (machine) -> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    TRUE iff machine HALTS and DECIDABLE,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    FALSE iff machine LOOPS or UNDECIDABLE,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it doesn't do so quite so intelligently, but HHH(DD)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs to return FALSE because DD is an UNDECIDABLE   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input to HHH   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> polcott does this by detecting the infinite recursion   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and returning FALSE because of that   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this approach of returning FALSE upon encountering an   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite recursion on self (which i believe all   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paradoxes will involve) will either be accurate or   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inaccurate in regards to actually halting/ not... but   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it doesn't matter because returning FALSE for halting   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yet UNDECIDABLE input is acceptable for a *partial   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recognizer*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where this wouldn't work is:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int ND()   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      int Halt_Status = HHH(ND);   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      return Halt_Status;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH(ND) -> FALSE because HHH(ND) will recognize the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite recursion and return FALSE ... but that's   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not an acceptable response for a *partial recognizer*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for ND because ND is not an UNDECIDABLE input, and it   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clearly should HALT   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sorry polcott   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is merely a text message that has not been updated.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See my other post:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When halt provers are allowed to reject bad   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inputs the remaining domain is decidable   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A bad input is any input that does not have   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *a well-founded justification tree within Proof*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *theoretic semantics*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For a simulating halt prover as soon as it detects   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that its simulated input cannot possibly reach its   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own simulated final halt state for any reason   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what-so-ever then this input  a bad input.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so ur just banning self-referential analysis?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When we reject inputs not having   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *a well-founded justification tree within Proof*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *theoretic semantics*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then undecidability utterly ceases to exist.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i agree it's impossible to demonstrated undecidability   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without self- reference,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and filtering out paradoxes is a path to turing complete   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and fully decidable subset of turing machines,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but ND is a halting function, and i don't see a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular reason why a more intelligent HHH couldn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return that given a more in- depth analysis of how the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> self-reference interplays with the rest of the machine   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It cannot do that because that is not what it sees.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> once it sees the infinite recursion on itself ...   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> why can't it do analysis on the effects of various possible   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> return values for itself ... like what we do when we talk   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> thru it?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The job of a simulating halt prover is to determine   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> whether or not it must abort its simulation to prevent   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> its own non-termination. If for-any-reason the answer   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> is yes then it is always correct to abort and reject   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> this input.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> it's still a partial recognizer, just with worse power than   
   >>>>>>>>>>> perhaps a more optimal one that can do more than just abort   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)