1. Forum
  2. Newsgroups
  3. comp.lang.c

  • Claude AI sums up my work in one page

    From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ on Sun Aug 10 01:06:23 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

    Claude AI proved why HHH(DD)==0 is correct in terms that
    any expert C programmer can understand. https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c

    Also
    https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCHPS.pdf
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
    hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,comp.lang.c on Sun Aug 10 11:26:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

    On 8/10/2025 11:00 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
    On 10/08/2025 13:30, Mr Flibble wrote:
    If DD() halts and HHH(DD) returns a result of non-halting then HHH is not
    a halt decider for DD: this just confirms that the extant Halting Problem
    proofs are correct and that you have wasted the last 22 years.

        It's Peter's time to waste, it's harmless, and no-one is forced
    to read his articles [I don't, nor other articles of over 100 lines or
    by certain ultra-prolific posters].  What surprises me is that /others/
    seem happy to write something like 10000 replies/year despite /knowing/
    that it makes no difference whatsoever to Peter or to his arguments or
    to anyone else.  Why do it, chaps?  You're not convincing /anyone/, not Peter, not other posters here, and even less those who've given up on
    this group.  There is no magic bullet!


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

    The key difference that we have now is the three LLM AI
    systems agree that DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot
    possibly reach its own "return" statement final halt state.

    They also agree that does make HHH(DD)==0 correct when
    judged entirely on that basis.

    Claude AI proved why HHH(DD)==0 is correct in terms that
    any expert C programmer can understand. https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c

    https://chatgpt.com/share/68939ee5-e2f8-8011-837d-438fe8e98b9c

    https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg%3D%3D_810120bb-5ab5-4bf8-af21-eedd0f09e141


    People here have been gaslighting me for at least three
    year by refusing to agree that HHH(DD)==0 on that basis.

    Since this first step of my proof must be understood
    before moving on to the next step their gaslighting was
    stonewalling.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
    hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.lang.c++,comp.theory,comp.lang.c on Sun Aug 10 21:01:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c

    On 8/10/2025 7:30 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
    On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 01:06:23 -0500, olcott wrote:

    Claude AI proved why HHH(DD)==0 is correct in terms that any expert C
    programmer can understand.
    https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c

    Also https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCHPS.pdf

    If DD() halts and HHH(DD) returns a result of non-halting then HHH is not
    a halt decider for DD: this just confirms that the extant Halting Problem proofs are correct and that you have wasted the last 22 years.

    /Flibble

    <Input to LLM systems>
    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.

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

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

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

    https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c

    https://chatgpt.com/share/68939ee5-e2f8-8011-837d-438fe8e98b9c

    https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg%3D%3D_810120bb-5ab5-4bf8-af21-eedd0f09e141


    All three LLM's agree that when HHH(DD) reports on the basis
    of DD correctly simulated by HHH then HHH(DD)==0 is correct.
    --
    Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
    hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2