On 10/23/2026 3:54 AM, Python wrote:
*keeps repeating unless aborted*
Line 03: simulated DD() invokes simulated HHH(DD) that simulates DD()
*Simulation invariant*
DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its
simulated final state.
Your own answer to A or B:
On 10/9/2026 6:53 AM, Python wrote:
You have established that correct application of the C operational
semantics within HHH produces the recursively simulated sequence:
ÿÿÿ HHH simulates DD
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ -> DD calls HHH(DD)
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ -> HHH simulates DD
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ -> ...
Agreed.
Peter, I understand perfectly well what I agreed to.
I agreed that IF HHH keeps recursively simulating the HHH call
encountered at DD line 03, then we obtain:
ÿÿ HHH -> DD -> HHH -> DD -> ...
and that recursive simulation does not naturally return.
"does not naturally return" only seems to have one meaning and that
meaning excludes "does naturally return".
A halt decider is only evaluating "does naturally return" versus
"does not naturally return", thus Python agrees.
--
Copyright 2026 Olcott
Axiom 1 --- Paraphrase of Emil Post definition of computation
All computations are equivalent to the application of finite
string transformation rules to finite string inputs to derive
any and all outputs.
Axiom 2
Deciders must apply finite string transformation inference
steps to their finite string inputs that are relevant to the
decision criteria and make their decision on this basis.
*Succinct refutation of the Halting Theorem*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/README.md
The essence of computation is applying finite
string transformations to finite string inputs
to derive outputs. // paraphrase of Emil Post
My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.
The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Ex