On 1/12/2024 6:06 PM, wij wrote:
> On 1/13/24 07:58, olcott wrote:
>> On 1/12/2024 5:53 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On 1/13/24 07:40, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 1/12/2024 4:36 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>> On 1/13/24 06:23, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/12/2024 4:17 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/13/24 06:08, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2024 3:55 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/13/24 05:44, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2024 3:26 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/13/24 03:01, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2024 10:40 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/24 15:24, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2024 12:43 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/11/24 15:22, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 15 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 14: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 06: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own line 06*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The correct simulation of D by H is the same simulation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you get when you simulate D by H1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do I really have to simulate D by H1 and then paste the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trace, or can you do that yourself?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be a deception to show the correct simulation of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D by H1,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as the correct simulation of D by H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is like saying the correct proof that 1+1=2 is the one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which Lisa Simpson knows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When I ask for the execution trace of D correctly simulated
>>>>>>>>>>>> by H
>>>>>>>>>>>> then providing any execution trace besides the execution
>>>>>>>>>>>> trace of
>>>>>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H IS THE WRONG ANSWER.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the same as I ask you: "What time is it?"
>>>>>>>>>>>> and you answer with the color of your car.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The Halting Problem asks for a program that determines
>>>>>>>>>>> whether an given
>>>>>>>>>>> input program will finish running or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Your POOH does not accept any input except the hard-coded D
>>>>>>>>>>> (as if it
>>>>>>>>>>> were an input). This is like I ask for the color of the car
>>>>>>>>>>> and you
>>>>>>>>>>> reply with the time on the wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that D correctly simulated by H cannot
>>>>>>>>>> possibly halt.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *** The Halting Problem asks for a program that determines
>>>>>>>>> whether an
>>>>>>>>> given input program will finish running or not.***
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You kept answering the time on the wall !!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What does your H,D have anything to do with the Halting Problem?
>>>>>>>>> Your POOH does not decide any given input !!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> MIT Professor Michael Sipser agreed that this verbatim paragraph
>>>>>>>> is correct
>>>>>>>> (a) 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
>>>>>>>> (b) H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>>>> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He is the author of the best selling book on the theory of
>>>>>>>> computation.
>>>>>>>> *D correctly simulated by H would never stop running unless
>>>>>>>> aborted*
>>>>>>>> (More precisely D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael-Sipser/dp/113318779X
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it were true (hardly true), you read a wrong book. See Peter
>>>>>>> Linz's book.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I contacted Professor Sipser directly and still have his
>>>>>> 10/13/2022 11:29:23 AM email agreeing to the verbatim words
>>>>>> of that paragraph.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. This is a serious lie, be careful.
>>>>> 2. If it were true, it is still nothing to the Halting Problem.
>>>>
>>>> *There is a long conversation about this in comp.theory*
>>>>
>>>> [Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt
>>>> decider]
>>>>
>>>> On 10/13/2022 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>  > MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following
>>>>  > verbatim paragraph is correct (he has not agreed to anything
>>>>  > else in this paper):
>>>>  >
>>>>  > 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.
>>>>  >
>>>>  > When one accepts this definition of a simulating halt decider
>>>>  > then my code shows that H correctly determines the halt status
>>>>  > of D.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> If what you said were true, you believed words of an idiot. However,
>>> this is not important.
>>>
>>
>> Professor Sipser is the #1 best selling author of Theory of
>> Computation textbooks
>>
>>> The Halting Problem asks for a program that determines whether an given
>>> input program will finish running or not.
>>>
>>
>> *Yes and the directly executed D(D) IS NOT A FREAKING INPUT*
>>
>>> The Halting Problem asks for a program that determines whether an given
>>> input program will finish running or not.
>>>
>>
>> *Yes and the directly executed D(D) IS NOT A FREAKING INPUT*
>>
>>> The Halting Problem asks for a program that determines whether an given
>>> input program will finish running or not.
>>>
>>
>> *Yes and the directly executed D(D) IS NOT A FREAKING INPUT*
>>
>>
>
> D is a function you selected, you already know everything about it
> inside out.

H does not reply on that.
There are all kinds of different sample inputs that H works with.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer