Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson


computers / comp.ai.philosophy / ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problem proof refutation

SubjectAuthor
* ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problemolcott
`* Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by haltingRichard Damon
 `- Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by haltingDon Stockbauer

1
ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problem proof refutation

<tr8sk4$3c1sg$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10539&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10539

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Subject: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problem
proof refutation
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 10:52:19 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <tr8sk4$3c1sg$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:52:21 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="305b6a6f28f0c6a0eec54ac1656281c5";
logging-data="3540880"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19OxhfNVcrpg9FrwEkJBB5S"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YinTZZ6Nl1e3uLESnxXllFtJMq0=
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Mon, 30 Jan 2023 16:52 UTC

These results are within the context of a specific dialogue.
I am working to minimize the dialogue required for ChatGPT to
understand my proof. This will allow others to replicate my
results. ChatGPT is currently overloaded with requests.

olcott
void D(void (*x)())
{ int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return;
}

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

olcott
This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
correct?

ChatGPT
It is a well-established fact that the program H is a variant of the
classic example of the "halting problem", which is used to demonstrate
that there is no general algorithm that can determine, for any given
program and input, whether or not that program halts on that input. In
the specific code you provided, the function D calls itself recursively
through the function H, creating an infinite loop that never halts.
Therefore, if the function H correctly simulates the behavior of D, it
should correctly determine that D never halts, and return 0 to main. So
in this case, H is correct.

olcott
void D(void (*x)())
{ int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
return Halt_Status;
}

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

H simulates D until D reaches its own "return" instruction.
Will the simulated D ever reach its own "return" instruction?

ChatGPT:
No, the simulated D would not reach its return instruction, because the
function Halt_Status = H(x, x) would result in an infinite recursion
between the function H and D, causing the program to run indefinitely
without reaching the return statement.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problem proof refutation

<bCYBL.93447$rKDc.23638@fx34.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10545&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10545

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx34.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1
Subject: Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting
problem proof refutation
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <tr8sk4$3c1sg$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <tr8sk4$3c1sg$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <bCYBL.93447$rKDc.23638@fx34.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:43:03 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 3152
 by: Richard Damon - Mon, 30 Jan 2023 23:43 UTC

You do understand that ChatGPT isn't a Theorem prover, and all you are
doing is prove you can decieve the AI.

On 1/30/23 11:52 AM, olcott wrote:
> These results are within the context of a specific dialogue.
> I am working to minimize the dialogue required for ChatGPT to
> understand my proof. This will allow others to replicate my
> results. ChatGPT is currently overloaded with requests.
>
> olcott
> void D(void (*x)())
> {
>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>   if (Halt_Status)
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> }
>
> olcott
> This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
> simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
> that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
> recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
> main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
> correct?
>
> ChatGPT
> It is a well-established fact that the program H is a variant of the
> classic example of the "halting problem", which is used to demonstrate
> that there is no general algorithm that can determine, for any given
> program and input, whether or not that program halts on that input. In
> the specific code you provided, the function D calls itself recursively
> through the function H, creating an infinite loop that never halts.
> Therefore, if the function H correctly simulates the behavior of D, it
> should correctly determine that D never halts, and return 0 to main. So
> in this case, H is correct.
>
> olcott
> void D(void (*x)())
> {
>   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>   return Halt_Status;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> }
>
> H simulates D until D reaches its own "return" instruction.
> Will the simulated D ever reach its own "return" instruction?
>
> ChatGPT:
> No, the simulated D would not reach its return instruction, because the
> function Halt_Status = H(x, x) would result in an infinite recursion
> between the function H and D, causing the program to run indefinitely
> without reaching the return statement.
>

Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting problem proof refutation

<05d1dc26-8246-4eb4-81e5-17ed42e65b72n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=10551&group=comp.ai.philosophy#10551

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4d5a:0:b0:3b6:3a22:812c with SMTP id x26-20020ac84d5a000000b003b63a22812cmr2457797qtv.96.1675169630729;
Tue, 31 Jan 2023 04:53:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:9801:0:b0:7d5:b884:3617 with SMTP id
a1-20020a259801000000b007d5b8843617mr4755489ybo.380.1675169630566; Tue, 31
Jan 2023 04:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 04:53:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <bCYBL.93447$rKDc.23638@fx34.iad>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.219.77.176; posting-account=iBgNeAoAAADRhzuSC4Ai7MUeMmxtwlM7
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.219.77.176
References: <tr8sk4$3c1sg$1@dont-email.me> <bCYBL.93447$rKDc.23638@fx34.iad>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <05d1dc26-8246-4eb4-81e5-17ed42e65b72n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: ChatGPT has correctly validated both elements of by halting
problem proof refutation
From: donstock...@hotmail.com (Don Stockbauer)
Injection-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 12:53:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 3700
 by: Don Stockbauer - Tue, 31 Jan 2023 12:53 UTC

On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 5:43:07 PM UTC-6, Richard Damon wrote:
> You do understand that ChatGPT isn't a Theorem prover, and all you are
> doing is prove you can decieve the AI.
> On 1/30/23 11:52 AM, olcott wrote:
> > These results are within the context of a specific dialogue.
> > I am working to minimize the dialogue required for ChatGPT to
> > understand my proof. This will allow others to replicate my
> > results. ChatGPT is currently overloaded with requests.
> >
> > olcott
> > void D(void (*x)())
> > {
> > int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> > if (Halt_Status)
> > HERE: goto HERE;
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > int main()
> > {
> > Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> > }
> >
> > olcott
> > This first sentence is an established fact: When H(D,D) correctly
> > simulates its input the execution trace of this simulated input proves
> > that it would never stop running because D continues to call H in
> > recursive simulation. Then H aborts its simulation of D and returns 0 to
> > main, indicating that D would never stop running unless aborted. Is H
> > correct?
> >
> > ChatGPT
> > It is a well-established fact that the program H is a variant of the
> > classic example of the "halting problem", which is used to demonstrate
> > that there is no general algorithm that can determine, for any given
> > program and input, whether or not that program halts on that input. In
> > the specific code you provided, the function D calls itself recursively
> > through the function H, creating an infinite loop that never halts.
> > Therefore, if the function H correctly simulates the behavior of D, it
> > should correctly determine that D never halts, and return 0 to main. So
> > in this case, H is correct.
> >
> > olcott
> > void D(void (*x)())
> > {
> > int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> > return Halt_Status;
> > }
> >
> > int main()
> > {
> > Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D, D));
> > }
> >
> > H simulates D until D reaches its own "return" instruction.
> > Will the simulated D ever reach its own "return" instruction?
> >
> > ChatGPT:
> > No, the simulated D would not reach its return instruction, because the
> > function Halt_Status = H(x, x) would result in an infinite recursion
> > between the function H and D, causing the program to run indefinitely
> > without reaching the return statement.
> >

when Olcott dies will champ GPT be able to write his biography?

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor