Both ChatGPT and Claude AI have agreed that these two
specifications are equivalent when the last two lines
of the first spec are interpreted to mean:

H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report
that [the simulated] D specifies a non-halting sequence
of configurations.

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
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.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

<Input to LLM systems>
Please think this all the way through without making any guesses

Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input until:
(a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern: abort simulation and
return 0.
(b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement: return 1.
(c) If HHH must abort its simulation to prevent its own non-termination
then HHH is correct to abort this simulation and return 0.

typedef int (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);

int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}

int main()
{
HHH(DD);
}

What value should HHH(DD) correctly return?
</Input to LLM systems>


https://chatgpt.com/share/68f37380-7168-8011-8e1f-0a18b557d123

https://claude.ai/share/16fdbf14-1a15-4af9-bbe9-cccd0b67541f


--
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)

On 10/18/2025 9:43 AM, vallor wrote:

At Sat, 18 Oct 2025 06:20:25 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

Puh-LEASE stop crossposting your...stuff...to comp.lang.c.

How about I only make one cross post per week and
always set followup to comp.theory?

--
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)

On 10/18/2025 10:53 AM, vallor wrote:

At Sat, 18 Oct 2025 09:48:01 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/18/2025 9:43 AM, vallor wrote:

At Sat, 18 Oct 2025 06:20:25 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>
Puh-LEASE stop crossposting your...stuff...to comp.lang.c.

How about I only make one cross post per week and
always set followup to comp.theory?

Why? You aren't posting about C.

The core of my whole proof that
*The halting problem is either incoherent or the proof wrong*
depends on this simple C code

<Input to LLM systems>
Please think this all the way through without making any guesses

Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input until:
(a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern: abort simulation and
return 0.
(b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement: return 1.
(c) If HHH must abort its simulation to prevent its own non-termination
then HHH is correct to abort this simulation and return 0.

typedef int (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);

int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}

int main()
{
HHH(DD);
}

What value should HHH(DD) correctly return?
</Input to LLM systems>

*Here is the 33 page proof, the last page is the key* https://claude.ai/share/0258f529-f92e-497b-86f5-e5751705a0d5

--
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)

On 18/10/2025 16:53, vallor wrote:

You aren't posting about C.

And I notice you crossposted this article (which has nothing to do with
C) and didn't set the followup-to (as you claimed you were going to do).

His reply was an honest enquiry about the proper use of comp.lang.c.

How about you paste into your reply to him on comp.lang.c a copy of the
big-8 steering board's rules for comp.lang.c. You posted nothing but a
demand for personal satisfaction. He might not even yet know what the authoritative comp.lang.c rules are nor their normative location. If
everyone demands their preference instead of telling each other the
actual rules and where to find them and their authority then sooner or
later the newsgroup will die because it's impossible to satisfy everyone perfectly ... I just looked at the contents of comp.lang.c, it looks
like that's happened since olcott is almost the only person starting
topics these days.

If the comp.lang.c charter allows a weekly digest of the interpretation
of a C program vs the manner of an English language specification and
the abilities of current LLMs to report on C programs and their
motivating specifications then it would be okay, wouldn't it?

I don't use comp.lang.c much any more but if it did then a weekly digest
of attempts to get detailed knowledge from a group topical for the
specific C program and the terminology relating to it would seem
appropriate to me.


--
Tristan Wibberley

The message body is Copyright (C) 2025 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 10/19/2025 4:58 AM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:

On 18/10/2025 16:53, vallor wrote:

You aren't posting about C.

And I notice you crossposted this article (which has nothing to do with
C) and didn't set the followup-to (as you claimed you were going to do).

His reply was an honest enquiry about the proper use of comp.lang.c.

How about you paste into your reply to him on comp.lang.c a copy of the
big-8 steering board's rules for comp.lang.c. You posted nothing but a
demand for personal satisfaction. He might not even yet know what the authoritative comp.lang.c rules are nor their normative location. If
everyone demands their preference instead of telling each other the
actual rules and where to find them and their authority then sooner or
later the newsgroup will die because it's impossible to satisfy everyone perfectly ... I just looked at the contents of comp.lang.c, it looks
like that's happened since olcott is almost the only person starting
topics these days.

If the comp.lang.c charter allows a weekly digest of the interpretation
of a C program vs the manner of an English language specification and
the abilities of current LLMs to report on C programs and their
motivating specifications then it would be okay, wouldn't it?

I don't use comp.lang.c much any more but if it did then a weekly digest
of attempts to get detailed knowledge from a group topical for the
specific C program and the terminology relating to it would seem
appropriate to me.

--
Tristan Wibberley

Thanks for your support.

The message body is Copyright (C) 2025 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.

--
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)

Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk>
writes:

On 18/10/2025 16:53, vallor wrote:

You aren't posting about C.

And I notice you crossposted this article (which has nothing to do with
C) and didn't set the followup-to (as you claimed you were going to do).

His reply was an honest enquiry about the proper use of comp.lang.c.

How about you paste into your reply to him on comp.lang.c a copy of the
big-8 steering board's rules for comp.lang.c.

[...]

Are you under the impression that the board has specific rules for
comp.lang.c?

Some newsgroups have charters. comp.lang.c does not, since it was
created before newsgroup charters were introduced.

(I personally encourage everyone not to reply to olcott's posts in
comp.lang.c. He's already taken over one newsgroup.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 2025-10-19 05:58, Tristan Wibberley wrote:

How about you paste into your reply to him on comp.lang.c a copy of the

big-8 steering board's rules for comp.lang.c. You posted nothing but a
demand for personal satisfaction. He might not even yet know what the authoritative comp.lang.c rules are nor their normative location. If
everyone demands their preference instead of telling each other the
actual rules and where to find them and their authority then sooner or
later the newsgroup will die because it's impossible to satisfy everyone perfectly ... I just looked at the contents of comp.lang.c, it looks
like that's happened since olcott is almost the only person starting
topics these days.

If the comp.lang.c charter allows a weekly digest of the interpretation
of a C program vs the manner of an English language specification and
the abilities of current LLMs to report on C programs and their
motivating specifications then it would be okay, wouldn't it?

comp.lang.c doesn't have a charter. It was created before having a
charter was a required part of the process for creating newsgroups, and
has never since been retrofitted with one.
Therefore, all that anyone can do is express their personal preferences
for how it should be used.
I personally prefer to point out that when they post a question to a
newsgroup where it's not on-topic, few of the participants are likely to
be interested, and few are likely to have relevant expertise.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 19/10/2025 20:56, Keith Thompson wrote:

Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> writes:

On 18/10/2025 16:53, vallor wrote:

You aren't posting about C.

And I notice you crossposted this article (which has nothing to do with
C) and didn't set the followup-to (as you claimed you were going to do).

His reply was an honest enquiry about the proper use of comp.lang.c.

How about you paste into your reply to him on comp.lang.c a copy of the
big-8 steering board's rules for comp.lang.c.

[...]

Are you under the impression that the board has specific rules for comp.lang.c?

Some newsgroups have charters. comp.lang.c does not, since it was
created before newsgroup charters were introduced.

(I personally encourage everyone not to reply to olcott's posts in comp.lang.c. He's already taken over one newsgroup.)

It's not just olcott to blame. Half the regulars, who should know
better, can't seem to resist taking part.

Maybe there is a dearth of more topical content.

But as it is, olcott has already pretty much taken over this one.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 19/10/2025 20:56, Keith Thompson wrote:

Are you under the impression that the board has specific rules for comp.lang.c?

not especially but I thought the comment would elicit a more
constructive proposal than application of new rules tantamount to
charter of mere interpersonal dominance.

Some newsgroups have charters. comp.lang.c does not, since it was
created before newsgroup charters were introduced.

(I personally encourage everyone not to reply to olcott's posts in comp.lang.c. He's already taken over one newsgroup.)

That's a more constructive proposal, thank you for adding your tuppence,
usenet needs yours in particular.


--
Tristan Wibberley

The message body is Copyright (C) 2025 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)