• All of my reviewers lie about this

    From olcott@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 22 09:16:19 2023
    XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory, comp.software-eng

    int D(int (*x)())
    {
    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
    if (Halt_Status)
    HERE: goto HERE;
    return Halt_Status;
    }

    It is a verified fact that H correctly predicts that D correctly
    simulated by H would never reach its own final state and terminate
    normally, thus H does correctly decide halting for its input D.

    Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill knows that
    *D simulated by H cannot possibly correctly reach its ret instruction*
    Everyone else lacks sufficient software engineering skill or lies

    _D()
    [00001d12] 55 push ebp
    [00001d13] 8bec mov ebp,esp
    [00001d15] 51 push ecx
    [00001d16] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
    [00001d19] 50 push eax // push D
    [00001d1a] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
    [00001d1d] 51 push ecx // push D
    [00001d1e] e83ff8ffff call 00001562 // call H
    [00001d23] 83c408 add esp,+08
    [00001d26] 8945fc mov [ebp-04],eax
    [00001d29] 837dfc00 cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
    [00001d2d] 7402 jz 00001d31
    [00001d2f] ebfe jmp 00001d2f
    [00001d31] 8b45fc mov eax,[ebp-04]
    [00001d34] 8be5 mov esp,ebp
    [00001d36] 5d pop ebp
    [00001d37] c3 ret


    --
    Copyright 2023 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: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From olcott@21:1/5 to Fritz Feldhase on Wed Feb 22 10:48:51 2023
    XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory, comp.software-eng

    On 2/22/2023 10:32 AM, Fritz Feldhase wrote:
    On Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 4:16:24 PM UTC+1, olcott wrote:

    int D(int (*x)())
    {
    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
    if (Halt_Status)
    HERE: goto HERE;
    return Halt_Status;
    }


    Just a comment: H cannot correctly "determine" the halt status of D(D).

    *straw-man*
    An intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is
    easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/straw_man

    You continue to ignore and erase the proof that H does correctly
    recognize the halt status of D. *This is the straw-man deception*



    Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill knows that
    *D simulated by H cannot possibly correctly reach its ret instruction*
    Everyone else lacks sufficient software engineering skill or lies

    _D()
    [00001d12] 55 push ebp
    [00001d13] 8bec mov ebp,esp
    [00001d15] 51 push ecx
    [00001d16] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
    [00001d19] 50 push eax // push D
    [00001d1a] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
    [00001d1d] 51 push ecx // push D
    [00001d1e] e83ff8ffff call 00001562 // call H
    [00001d23] 83c408 add esp,+08
    [00001d26] 8945fc mov [ebp-04],eax
    [00001d29] 837dfc00 cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
    [00001d2d] 7402 jz 00001d31
    [00001d2f] ebfe jmp 00001d2f
    [00001d31] 8b45fc mov eax,[ebp-04]
    [00001d34] 8be5 mov esp,ebp
    [00001d36] 5d pop ebp
    [00001d37] c3 ret

    H simulates D until reaching machine address [00001d1e].
    Which calls H to simulate D again.

    There are two possible behaviors for at this point:
    (a) H continues to simulate D recursively until stack space is
    exhausted.

    (b) H aborts the entire simulation sequence at some point between
    machine address [00001d12] and [00001d1e].

    In both of these cases D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach
    the ret instruction at machine address [00001d37].

    Most novices with the halting theorem do not understand that halting
    means reaching a final state and terminating normally.

    --
    Copyright 2023 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: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Wed Feb 22 19:51:32 2023
    XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory, comp.software-eng

    On 2/22/23 10:16 AM, olcott wrote:
    int D(int (*x)())
    {
      int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
      if (Halt_Status)
        HERE: goto HERE;
      return Halt_Status;
    }

    It is a verified fact that H correctly predicts that D correctly
    simulated by H would never reach its own final state and terminate
    normally, thus H does correctly decide halting for its input D.

    Which since in computability theory, the halting problem is the problem
    of determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program and
    an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue to run
    forever.

    This just proves that you have never been actually working on the
    Halting problem and all you claimes of that have been lies.


    Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill knows that
    *D simulated by H cannot possibly correctly reach its ret instruction* Everyone else lacks sufficient software engineering skill or lies

    So, D(D) will halt and UTM(D,D) will halt, which says that the correct
    answer to the Halting Problem is that H(D,D) must say Halting.

    All you have done is showed that it is impossible for your H to ever
    prove this fact.


    _D()
     [00001d12] 55         push ebp
     [00001d13] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
     [00001d15] 51         push ecx
     [00001d16] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
     [00001d19] 50         push eax       // push D
     [00001d1a] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
     [00001d1d] 51         push ecx       // push D
     [00001d1e] e83ff8ffff call 00001562  // call H
     [00001d23] 83c408     add esp,+08
     [00001d26] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
     [00001d29] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
     [00001d2d] 7402       jz 00001d31
     [00001d2f] ebfe       jmp 00001d2f
     [00001d31] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
     [00001d34] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
     [00001d36] 5d         pop ebp
     [00001d37] c3         ret



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Wed Feb 22 19:59:54 2023
    XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory, comp.software-eng

    On 2/22/23 11:48 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 2/22/2023 10:32 AM, Fritz Feldhase wrote:
    On Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 4:16:24 PM UTC+1, olcott wrote:

    int D(int (*x)())
    {
    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
    if (Halt_Status)
    HERE: goto HERE;
    return Halt_Status;
    }


    Just a comment: H cannot correctly "determine" the halt status of D(D).

    *straw-man*
    An intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/straw_man

    which since in computability theory, the halting problem is the problem
    of determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program and
    an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue to run
    forever.

    Says that is EXACTLY what your "alternate" criteria is.


    You continue to ignore and erase the proof that H does correctly
    recognize the halt status of D. *This is the straw-man deception*


    LIE.



    Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill knows that
    *D simulated by H cannot possibly correctly reach its ret instruction* Everyone else lacks sufficient software engineering skill or lies

    Which just proves that you aren't working on the Halting Problem.

    The fact that D(D) halts, and UTM(D,D) Halts, says the correct answer
    for a HALT decider is Halting, so since H(D,D) answers non-halting, it
    isn't one.

    All you have shown is that it might be a correct (but worthless) POOP
    decider.


    _D()
     [00001d12] 55         push ebp
     [00001d13] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
     [00001d15] 51         push ecx
     [00001d16] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
     [00001d19] 50         push eax       // push D
     [00001d1a] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
     [00001d1d] 51         push ecx       // push D
     [00001d1e] e83ff8ffff call 00001562  // call H
     [00001d23] 83c408     add esp,+08
     [00001d26] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
     [00001d29] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
     [00001d2d] 7402       jz 00001d31
     [00001d2f] ebfe       jmp 00001d2f
     [00001d31] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
     [00001d34] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
     [00001d36] 5d         pop ebp
     [00001d37] c3         ret

    H simulates D until reaching machine address [00001d1e].
    Which calls H to simulate D again.

    Which we KNOW will abort its simulation of its input and return 0, and
    thus the actual CORRECT (and complete) simulation of the input will halt.

    All you have shown is that H will ALWAYS abort its simulation too early
    and by using UNSOUND logic get the wrong answer.


    There are two possible behaviors for at this point:
    (a) H continues to simulate D recursively until stack space is
        exhausted.

    No, there is ONE possible behavior, the behavior that H has been
    programed with.

    Since you claim that H WILL abort its simulation and return 0 in this
    case, (a) NEVER HAPPENS, and can not be used in the arguemen.

    That is just lookling at something that isn't the input to the machine


    (b) H aborts the entire simulation sequence at some point between
    machine address [00001d12] and [00001d1e].

    Which it does


    In both of these cases D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach
    the ret instruction at machine address [00001d37].

    Right, but the CORRECT (and complete) simulation does, as does the
    actual exectution.

    Since In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program and an
    input, whether the program will finish running, or continue to run forever

    That means the CORRECT answer is Halting.

    You are just working on a different problem and lying about what you are
    doing.


    Most novices with the halting theorem do not understand that halting
    means reaching a final state and terminating normally.


    Right, OF THE MACHINE.

    An ABORTED simulation does not tell us if the results is Halting or Not,
    just like looking at the first mile of a road doesn't tell yoy how long
    it is, except that it is at least 1 mile long.

    You are just showing that you do not understand what it is you are
    talking about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)