On 11/11/2025 3:38 PM, olcott wrote:
On 11/11/2025 1:17 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-11, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 10:09 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-11, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 9:55 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-10, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/10/2025 5:09 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-10, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
That is not the behavior that the input to H(D) specifies.
Insane nonsense.
The input to H is one single D which specifies one single behavior. >>>>>>>>
simulator.exe simulates Test.c. This simulates D that
calls H(D) that the simulator recognizes as itself.
"recognizing self" is an undecidable problem.
simulator.exe is
... a figment of your imagination, and has whatever
properties you need it to have to suit whatever narrative
you are spinning at the moment.
On 11/3/2025 10:28 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
The interpreter API consists of primitives built
into the system, so it isn't traced.
The internals of these primitives can be imagined
without being directly specified.
In my interpreter walkthrough I more or less specified /what/ the
interfaces do with the example. It is very clear how the simulation
object tracks the control flows and steps into statements; it is
plausible due to these details; no step requires "magical thinking"
or the solution to incomputable problems.
You are not specifying anything concrete, neither by a body of
requirements, nor by concrete example.
typedef int (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
int DD()
{
ÿÿÿ int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
ÿÿÿ if (Halt_Status)
ÿÿÿÿÿ HERE: goto HERE;
ÿÿÿ return Halt_Status;
}
int main()
{
ÿÿÿ HHH(DD);
}
I will just go back to my original code
if you want to play head games.
It has been shown with actual programming against your code framework
that abortind deciders leave behind continuable simulations, which may
terminate.
Only if you don't resume them at the
exact same state where you left them
and that is flat our cheating.
Mike Terry has evidently taken the code and perfected it; he removed all
your invalid hacks from the "H" and "D" resulting in pure functions.
With that he actually obtained evidence of an infinite simulation
tower starting up in which the individual D's terminate.
Yet that is clearly cheating.
Whether or not it is possible for HHH to determine
that its input DOES NOT HALT any sufficiently competent
C programmer (that is not a damned liar) can easily
see this.
The non-halting behavior axiom is only differs from
infinite recursion in that it is recursive simulation
and not recursive invocation.
I honestly cannot believe that anyone denying
that the input to HHH(DD) does not halt as
anything but a damned liar. Not any ordinary
liar, a liar that is literally condemned to
actual Hell (if such a place exists).
The reason that I am so harsh about this is because
a system that can compute truth can end the killing
of the entire planet by very well paid hired liars.
My paper outlines many key details required to
accomplish this.
We are moving the USA to the brink of the rise of
the fourth Reich only because True(x) is not computable.
Trump is about 45% of the way to achieving Hitler's
own power only because we cannot effectively counter
his Nazi propaganda.
When True(x) is computable an LLM can counter-act every
liar every which way simultaneously.
*How pathological self-reference is confused with undecidability*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/397442168_How_pathological_self-reference_is_confused_with_undecidability
https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCMTO-2.pdf
https://claude.ai/share/c9df30cf-ff71-46bf-9647-c78ed95cb389
You've done a number of things wrong in the Halt7 test cases:
- conflating instruction traces from multiple independent simulations
ÿÿ into one stream, thus falsely identifying recursion where there is
ÿÿ none.
- using a "Root" flag to get a top-level HHH to behave differently
ÿÿ from the child HHH instances, so that it's two different functions.
You cannot be pulling such stunts if you're going to present
anything to serious academia.
Every HHH must have an e
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)