On 8/9/25 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/9/2025 7:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
Without realising it Olcott has actually confirmed rather than refuted
the
Halting Problem:
In x86utm, H simulates D(D), detects the nested recursion as non-halting,
aborts, and returns 0 (non-halting). But when D(D) runs for real:
* It calls H(D,D).
* H simulates, aborts the simulation (not the real execution), and
returns
0 (non-halting).
* D, receiving 0 (non-halting), halts.
Thus, the actual machine D(D) halts, but H reported "does not halt". H is
wrong about the machine's behavior which aligns with the diagonalization
paradox at the heart of extant Halting Problem proofs.
/Flibble
*This does not quite say it that way* https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c
*It does say that HHH(DD)==0 is correct*
Because you decieve it.
If the answer isn't stable to minor changes in the prompt, it is likely
not based on actual facts.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)