01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must
abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D* https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
On 2/3/2024 2:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 2:13 PM, olcott wrote:
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must
abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination.
So it is a corrrect POOP decider.
Since for every H(D,D) that returns 0, D(D) will Halt
IT CAN'T be a "Correct" Halt Decider by the DEFINITIONS.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
And you paper just shows that any H that answers does not "correctly"
simulation it inputs per the definition of a UTM.
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its simulated final
state in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
You arte just proving that you are a pathological liar, and an idiot.
That is libelous.
Your errors have been explained, an accepted since not refuted, and
you are showing your utter inability to learn or apply correct logic,
likely because you have "brainwashed" yourself with your own lies.
On 2/3/2024 3:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 3:38 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 2:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 2:13 PM, olcott wrote:
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must
abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination.
So it is a corrrect POOP decider.
Since for every H(D,D) that returns 0, D(D) will Halt
IT CAN'T be a "Correct" Halt Decider by the DEFINITIONS.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
And you paper just shows that any H that answers does not
"correctly" simulation it inputs per the definition of a UTM.
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its simulated final
state in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
And H that actually correctly simulates its input will not answer.
The following only requires N steps of correct simulation.
Your ADD prevents you from paying enough attention to see this.
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
On 10/13/2022 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following
verbatim paragraph is correct ...
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 H can abort its simulation
of D and correctly report that D specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations.
On 2/3/2024 4:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 3:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 3:38 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 2:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 2:13 PM, olcott wrote:
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must
abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination.
So it is a corrrect POOP decider.
Since for every H(D,D) that returns 0, D(D) will Halt
IT CAN'T be a "Correct" Halt Decider by the DEFINITIONS.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
And you paper just shows that any H that answers does not
"correctly" simulation it inputs per the definition of a UTM.
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its simulated
final state in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
And H that actually correctly simulates its input will not answer.
The following only requires N steps of correct simulation.
Your ADD prevents you from paying enough attention to see this.
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
Except once H aborts its simulation, the CORRECT simulation of the
input, which uses that EXACT SAME H AS ABORTED, will continue past the
point that H aborted, sees its simulted first simulated H abort its
simulation and return to the first simulated D and it Halting.
H didn't correctly simulate its input, so any criteria based on "A
correct simulation by H" is VOIDED by H not meeting the requirement to
DO an actual correct simulation.
The ACTUAL definition of what H needs to do is predict the behavior of
the computation described by its input, which if you are doing the
proof calculation is the D built on the specific H that is giving the
answer, and thus the H that aborted it simulation.
On 10/13/2022 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following
verbatim paragraph is correct ...
;
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 H can abort its simulation
of D and correctly report that D specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations.
;
Right, and it did not CORRECTLY determine that its CORRCT simulation
would not halt, since it doesn't do a correct simulation.
That you are unable to comprehend that N steps of correct simulation correctly simulates these N steps is merely yet another instance of
your denial of self-evident truths.
You are also horrendously terrible at understanding that when every
element of a set has a property that this semantically entails
that each element of this same set has this property.
When zero elements of every H that simulates D can ever stop
running unless they abort their simulation of D then this
entails D species non-halting behavior.
It is like you are disagreeing that cats are cats because
you firmly believe that cats are dogs, never comprehending
that disagreeing with a tautology is always necessarily incorrect.
On 2/3/2024 6:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 6:14 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 4:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 3:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 3:38 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 2:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 2:13 PM, olcott wrote:
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int functionSo it is a corrrect POOP decider.
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must >>>>>>>>> abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination. >>>>>>>>
Since for every H(D,D) that returns 0, D(D) will Halt
IT CAN'T be a "Correct" Halt Decider by the DEFINITIONS.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D* >>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
And you paper just shows that any H that answers does not
"correctly" simulation it inputs per the definition of a UTM.
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its simulated
final state in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
And H that actually correctly simulates its input will not answer. >>>>>>
The following only requires N steps of correct simulation.
Your ADD prevents you from paying enough attention to see this.
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
Except once H aborts its simulation, the CORRECT simulation of the
input, which uses that EXACT SAME H AS ABORTED, will continue past
the point that H aborted, sees its simulted first simulated H abort
its simulation and return to the first simulated D and it Halting.
H didn't correctly simulate its input, so any criteria based on "A
correct simulation by H" is VOIDED by H not meeting the requirement
to DO an actual correct simulation.
The ACTUAL definition of what H needs to do is predict the behavior
of the computation described by its input, which if you are doing
the proof calculation is the D built on the specific H that is
giving the answer, and thus the H that aborted it simulation.
On 10/13/2022 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following
verbatim paragraph is correct ...
;
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 H can abort its simulation
of D and correctly report that D specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations.
;
Right, and it did not CORRECTLY determine that its CORRCT simulation
would not halt, since it doesn't do a correct simulation.
That you are unable to comprehend that N steps of correct simulation
correctly simulates these N steps is merely yet another instance of
your denial of self-evident truths.
I have not said that H doesn't PARTIALLY simulate the first N steps of
the behavior of the input.
That is NOT a "Correct Simulation" by the definition of a UTM, and
In other words a correct simulation of N states is an incorrect
simulation of N states.
On 2/3/2024 6:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 7:36 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 6:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 6:14 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 4:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:That you are unable to comprehend that N steps of correct simulation >>>>> correctly simulates these N steps is merely yet another instance of
On 2/3/2024 3:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 3:38 PM, olcott wrote:
On 2/3/2024 2:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 2:13 PM, olcott wrote:
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int functionSo it is a corrrect POOP decider.
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must >>>>>>>>>>> abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination. >>>>>>>>>>
Since for every H(D,D) that returns 0, D(D) will Halt
IT CAN'T be a "Correct" Halt Decider by the DEFINITIONS.
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D* >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
And you paper just shows that any H that answers does not
"correctly" simulation it inputs per the definition of a UTM. >>>>>>>>>>
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its simulated >>>>>>>>> final state in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
And H that actually correctly simulates its input will not answer. >>>>>>>>
The following only requires N steps of correct simulation.
Your ADD prevents you from paying enough attention to see this.
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
Except once H aborts its simulation, the CORRECT simulation of the >>>>>> input, which uses that EXACT SAME H AS ABORTED, will continue past >>>>>> the point that H aborted, sees its simulted first simulated H
abort its simulation and return to the first simulated D and it
Halting.
H didn't correctly simulate its input, so any criteria based on "A >>>>>> correct simulation by H" is VOIDED by H not meeting the
requirement to DO an actual correct simulation.
The ACTUAL definition of what H needs to do is predict the
behavior of the computation described by its input, which if you
are doing the proof calculation is the D built on the specific H
that is giving the answer, and thus the H that aborted it simulation. >>>>>>
On 10/13/2022 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following
verbatim paragraph is correct ...
;
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 H can abort its simulation
of D and correctly report that D specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations.
;
Right, and it did not CORRECTLY determine that its CORRCT
simulation would not halt, since it doesn't do a correct simulation. >>>>>
your denial of self-evident truths.
I have not said that H doesn't PARTIALLY simulate the first N steps
of the behavior of the input.
That is NOT a "Correct Simulation" by the definition of a UTM, and
In other words a correct simulation of N states is an incorrect
simulation of N states.
No, it is just not a "Correct Simulation" for the purposes of
determining Halting, it is just a Correct Partial Simulation.
It shows Hasn't Halted so far, not that it will never halt.
Your ADD continues to totally screw you up.
*Read this 500 times if you need to*
H correctly simulates its input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never stop running unless aborted then H can abort its simulation.
*Correct Halt Status Criteria*
That H sees that D is calling itself with its same parameters may
by itself prove that D specifies non-halting behavior.
*Since D is a pure function* (as required by the theory of computation)
If there were any conditional branch instructions in D prior to
this call it is already proved that they didn't make any difference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function
01 int D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
It is self-evident that every H that correctly simulates D must
abort its simulation of D to prevent its own non-termination.
The following only requires N steps of correct simulation.
Your ADD prevents you from paying enough attention to see this.
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
simulates its input D until ...
On 2/3/2024 4:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 2/3/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:
Right, and it did not CORRECTLY determine that its CORRCT simulation
would not halt, since it doesn't do a correct simulation.
That you are unable to comprehend that N steps of correct simulation correctly simulates these N steps is merely yet another instance of
your denial of self-evident truths.
When zero elements of every H that simulates D
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 307 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 36:31:42 |
Calls: | 6,910 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 12,376 |
Messages: | 5,428,699 |
Posted today: | 2 |