Path: ...!news.mixmin.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: Can D simulated by H terminate normally? POE Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 14:06:44 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 262 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:06:45 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5b5cf6fc6ad4bf43d1327b7299fd7236"; logging-data="1280804"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19m6koW6knIy+vipz1YhrpY" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:5/+kzF1D1sJBL6Ju8LrXZcnvqlM= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 12175 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. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is psychotic that people really believes that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> principle of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> explosion is valid inference even though there is zero >>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubt the it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> derives the non-sequitur error. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, that just means you don't understand how logic works. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU are the psychotic. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *When we encode the principle of explosion as a syllogism* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Socrates is a man. ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========