Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 21:36:03 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 114 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 06 May 2024 04:36:04 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2ca33c147f4bf21714ceb8650be68951"; logging-data="2456051"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+aQkrywcQ+7DmMdsLYCtGX" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:ksgxN4UVK+TK94lyMuIccqpZv+4= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 5391 On 5/5/2024 5:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/5/24 6:03 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 5/5/2024 4:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 5/5/24 3:10 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/5/2024 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 5/5/24 1:02 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> The x86utm operating system: https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm >>>>>> enables >>>>>> one C function to execute another C function in debug step mode. >>>>>> Simulating Termination analyzer H simulates the x86 machine code >>>>>> of its >>>>>> input (using libx86emu) in debug step mode until it correctly >>>>>> matches a >>>>>> correct non-halting behavior pattern proving that its input will >>>>>> never >>>>>> stop running unless aborted. >>>>> >>>>> Except that the pattern it uses is incorrect, since H(D,D) using >>>>> this "pattern" says that D(D) will not halt, where, when main calls >>>>> D(D), it does return/halt, so H is just incorrect. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Can D correctly simulated by H terminate normally? >>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function >>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x) >>>>>> 02 { >>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x); >>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status) >>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status; >>>>>> 07 } >>>>>> 08 >>>>>> 09 int main() >>>>>> 10 { >>>>>> 11   H(D,D); >>>>>> 12 } >>>>>> >>>>>> *Execution Trace* >>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D); >>>>>> >>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted) >>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D) >>>>>> >>>>>> *Simulation invariant* >>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line >>>>>> 03. >>>>> >>>>> Nope, PROVEN WRONG AND THE PROOF IGNORED, PO have even claimed that >>>>> it would be trivial to show the error in the proof, but hasn't done >>>>> it, showing that he doesn't actually have an answer to the >>>>> refutation, and thus by just repeating a statment that is know to >>>>> at least potentially have a problem as if it was just clearly true >>>>> is just a pathological lie. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The above execution trace proves that (for every H/D pair of the >>>>>> infinite set of H/D pairs) each D(D) simulated by the H that this >>>>>> D(D) >>>>>> calls cannot possibly reach past its own line 03. >>>>> >>>>> Except that the proof shows that you are not smart enough to think >>>>> of some of the ways arround the problem (even though those methods >>>>> were discussed a long time back) >>>>> >>>> >>>> The above execution trace proves the behavior of each D simulated by >>>> each H of the elements of the infinite set of H/D pairs where this D >>>> calls that H. >>> >>> Nope, your problem is you stop simulating at the call to H and then >>> resort to incorrect logic to try to figure out what happens next. >>> >> >> I have to usually tell you the exactly same thing several >> hundreds of times before you notice that I ever said it once. >> >> We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where >> D is simulated by the same H that D calls. >> >> We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where >> D is simulated by the same H that D calls. >> >> We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where >> D is simulated by the same H that D calls. >> >> H that simulates the D that calls H(D,D) will simulate to >> 1 ∞ steps of D. > > Nope, when your H simulates the call to H(D,D) inside D, your H does NOT > simulated that H, but instead simultes the machine that that machine > would be simulating. > I am not talking about my H I am talking about every element of the infinite set of H/D pairs where D is simulated by the same H that D calls. The 1st H simulates 1 steps of D The 2nd H simulates 2 steps of D The 3rd H simulates 3 steps of D .... The 5,000,000,000 H simulates 5,000,000,000 steps of D .... All the way up to H that simulates ∞ steps of D None of these D(D) simulated by the H that D(D) calls ever reach past their own line 03. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer