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

[olcott]

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

[Richard Damon]

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