From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

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

01 int DD()
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 HHH(DD);
12 }

<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>

HHH does correctly simulate its input DD
(where correct is defined by the operational semantics
of the C programming language and includes HHH simulating
and instance of its simulating DD)

until HHH correctly determines that its simulated DD
would never stop running unless aborted on the basis
of matching this non-halting behavior pattern:

HHH watches the behavior of its simulated input and
as soon as HHH sees that DD calls the same function
FROM THE SAME ADDRESS twice in sequence and there
are no conditional branch instructions from the
beginning of DD until this call this matches the
"infinite recursion" non-halting behavior pattern.

line 996
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c

// CALL from same address to Same Function no escape
if (current->Simplified_Opcode == CALL)
if (current->Simplified_Opcode == traced->Simplified_Opcode) // CALL
if (current->Address == traced->Address) // from same address
if (current->Decode_Target == traced->Decode_Target) // to Same Function
if (Count_Conditional_Branch_Instructions == 0) // no escape
{
OutputString((char*)"Local Halt Decider: "
"Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped\n\n");
return 1;
}
--
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.

*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* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2