Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #86842 > unrolled thread

Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-08 19:18 -0500
    Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-10-09 09:23 +0000
    Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-10-09 15:29 +0200
      Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-09 14:32 -0500
        Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2022-10-09 20:43 +0000
          Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-10-10 09:31 -0700
          Re: Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-10 12:05 -0500

#86842 — Simulating halt deciders refute the halting theorem

Once one accepts the notion of a simulating halt decider that continues 
to correctly simulate its input until it correctly determines that the 
this simulated input would never stop running then the conventional 
halting problem proofs are refuted.

typedef void (*ptr)();
int H(ptr p, ptr i); // simulating halt decider

// P does the opposite of whatever H decides
void P(ptr x)
{
   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
   if (Halt_Status)    // if H(P,P) reports that its input halts
     HERE: goto HERE;  // P loops and never halts
   return;             // else P halts
}

int main()
{
   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(P, P));
}

Complete halt deciding system (Visual Studio Project)
(a) x86utm operating system
(b) x86 emulator adapted from libx86emu to compile under Windows
(c) Several halt deciders and their sample inputs contained within Halt7.c
https://liarparadox.org/2022_09_07.zip


-- 
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#86844

On Sat, 8 Oct 2022 19:18:40 -0500
olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>Once one accepts the notion of a simulating halt decider that continues 
>to correctly simulate its input until it correctly determines that the 

Oh, its you again. Haven't you found another esoteric hobby horse to bore
everyone with by now?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86845

The halting problem can only be viewed scientifically in fairly
simple programs. With any program of worldly size, that no longer
makes sense. That's why it's all pretty unworldly nonsense for
people who have lost their grip on reality.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86847

On 10/9/2022 8:29 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> The halting problem can only be viewed scientifically in fairly
> simple programs. With any program of worldly size, that no longer
> makes sense. That's why it's all pretty unworldly nonsense for
> people who have lost their grip on reality.

The halting theorem prevents any serious funding of termination analysis 
research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis

in the same way that the Tarski Undefinability theorem prevents truth 
conditional semantics from ever being anchored in a formal definition of 
truth, thus hampering AI research funding.

My focus on the halting theorem also simultaneously addresses the 
analogous 1931 Gödel incompleteness theorem and the Tarski 
Undefinability theorem.

I focus on the HP because it is the only one of the set of three 
analogous problems that can be exhaustively analyzed within existing 
formal systems. Both Gödel and Tarski require a paradigm shift in the 
notion of a formal system before they can be sufficiently analyzed.

Wittgenstein's analysis of Gödel provides a glimpse into this paradigm 
shift when he concludes that Gödel's G is simply untrue within its 
formal system. https://www.liarparadox.org/Wittgenstein.pdf



-- 
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86848

On 2022-10-09, olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> The halting theorem prevents any serious funding of termination analysis 
> research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis

Even if so, you're not making the best of use of the self-funding you
have; your research goes in circles.

If you were funded, and they found out you just post volumes on
Usenet without going anywhere, it's likely the funding would be
swiftly cut off.

It's not a probelm of money.

-- 
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86858

Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> writes:

> On 2022-10-09, olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The halting theorem prevents any serious funding of termination analysis
>> research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis
>
> Even if so, you're not making the best of use of the self-funding you
> have;  your research goes in circles.
>
> If you were funded, and they found out you just post volumes on
> Usenet without going anywhere, it's likely the funding would be
> swiftly cut off.
>
> It's not a probelm of money.

The problem here is you, responding to this idiot instead of just
ignoring him like all sensible people do.  And cross-posting only
makes it worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86860

On 10/9/2022 3:43 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2022-10-09, olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The halting theorem prevents any serious funding of termination analysis
>> research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis
> 
> Even if so, you're not making the best of use of the self-funding you
> have; your research goes in circles.
> 
> If you were funded, and they found out you just post volumes on
> Usenet without going anywhere, it's likely the funding would be
> swiftly cut off.
> 
> It's not a probelm of money.
> 

Once one accepts the notion of a simulating halt decider that continues 
to correctly simulate its input until it correctly determines that this 
simulated input would never stop running then the conventional halting 
problem proofs are refuted because their "impossible" input becomes 
correctly construed as specifying recursive simulation (same idea as 
infinite recursion).

An extended conversation with the former editor in chief of the 
Communications of the ACM: Moshe Y. Vardi indicated that I must be able 
to apply my work to the diagonal argument so I just did that.

*Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364302709_Rebutting_the_Sipser_Halting_Problem_Proof 




-- 
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web