Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally? POE
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 07:25:25 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v0o035$2j1tu$2@i2pn2.org>
References: <v0k4jc$laej$1@dont-email.me> <v0k6eo$2djoe$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v0k70f$lpet$1@dont-email.me> <v0k9co$2djoe$11@i2pn2.org>
 <v0ka8h$qb8e$1@dont-email.me> <v0kb4e$2djoe$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v0kcio$qqsq$1@dont-email.me> <v0kftr$2djof$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v0kgph$rhfr$1@dont-email.me> <v0li19$2g492$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0ljuk$12q0o$2@dont-email.me> <v0lkpi$2g492$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v0lllg$135k7$1@dont-email.me> <v0m1bh$2gl1f$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m2jd$166o1$2@dont-email.me> <v0m3t5$2gl1e$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m46m$16k3h$2@dont-email.me> <v0m5a9$2gl1e$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m6o5$172p4$5@dont-email.me> <v0m83f$2gl1f$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v0miig$19rb3$1@dont-email.me> <v0mkfg$2hf3s$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0n6ea$1hdqe$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 11:25:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2721726"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v0n6ea$1hdqe$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 17023
Lines: 374

On 4/29/24 12:07 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/28/2024 6:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 4/28/24 6:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 4/28/2024 2:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 4/28/24 3:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 4/28/2024 1:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/28/24 2:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 1:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 1:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 12:34 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 9:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 9:45 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 8:13 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 11:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 10:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 9:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 7:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 8:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can D simulated by H terminate normally?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The x86utm operating system based on an open 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source x86 emulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This system enables one C function to execute 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another C function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in debug step mode. When H simulates D it creates 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a separate process
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> context for D with its own memory, stack and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual registers. H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is able to simulate D simulating itself, thus the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only limit to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recursive simulations is RAM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // The following is written in C
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 typedef int (*ptr)(); // pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 int H(ptr x, ptr y)    // uses x86 emulator to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulate its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14   D(D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 15 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Execution Trace
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 14: main() invokes D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keeps repeating (unless aborted)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 06: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simulation invariant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own line 09.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it dead obvious to everyone here when 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> examining the execution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trace of lines 14 and 06 above that D correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by H cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly terminate normally by reaching its own 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line 09?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except that you fail to mention that you have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admitted that you are NOT working on the Halting 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Problem, despite trying to use terminology similar 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to it, but having stipulated definition that are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in conflict with computaiton theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note, "keeps repeating (unless aborted)" is a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misleading statement, as your H will ALWAYS abort 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this input, and thus it NEVER will "Keep repeating".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't like me pointing out the problem because 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you prefer to be able to LIE to people about what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You work has NOTHING to do with Halting, as your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H/D are not even turing equivalenet to their 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> namesakes in the proof you like to mention.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the exact verbatim post and the first 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> respondent agreed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and immediately noticed that I was referring to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I will go with what I said, you just don't know 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> C very
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well and want to keep that hidden behind rhetoric 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and denigration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you couch it to SOUND like the halting problem, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it isn't as you have FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning of terms.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus, to act like it is, just makes you a LIAR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halting is NOT about H being able to simulate it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input to the final state. PERIOD.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I could show how it is but you prefer to believe 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise and refuse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to go through the detailed steps required.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you CAN'T, because you have FUNDAMENTALLY changed 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question, sinc eyou claim that even though D(D) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halts, that H(D,D) is correct to say not halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not my error it is your indoctrination.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, How is H(D,D) saying false correct if D(D) Halts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You refuse to go through the mandatory steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU are the only one that says they are "Manditory".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That doesn't make them so for me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU refuse to explain how a Halting Turing Machine can be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly decider as "Non-Halting".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your "excuses" all seem to boil down to you just need to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lie about what you are actually doing and that you refuse 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to even learn what the actual rules and language of what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are saying you are doing are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SInce the DEFINITION of the quesiton that H, the Halt 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decider, is to answer is if the computation describe by 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its input (that is D(D) ) will halt when run.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have to hide behind obfuscation, blusgter and LIES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since you don't seem to know that actual meaning of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words you use, as you have even occationally admitted, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is clear who knows what they are talking about and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who doesn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will also point out that you have effectively admitted 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that your statements are unsopported as you always fail 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to provide actual references to accepted ground for your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========