Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Subject: Re: The execution trace of HHH1(DDD) shows the divergence
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:44:19 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 184
Message-ID: <102dlv4$2g4ls$1@dont-email.me>
References: <1021ii4$3327l$6@dont-email.me>
 <slrn104j0nc.7sc.anthk@openbsd.home> <102d5go$298tj$1@dont-email.me>
 <2f50f921b71a1e79a6f3cf84f5428fee42355978@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 06:44:20 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9f0ba097a1221e597ea76cc26b2e661a";
	logging-data="2626236"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19DkBdYWqTOqpxX6FVvjUnn"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TBnyOiMYlPhd2Z14AuxHdwYVkUw=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250611-4, 6/11/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <2f50f921b71a1e79a6f3cf84f5428fee42355978@i2pn2.org>

On 6/11/2025 8:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/11/25 8:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/11/2025 4:06 PM, anthk wrote:
>>> On 2025-06-07, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The execution trace of HHH1(DDD) shows the divergence
>>>> of DDD emulated by HHH from DDD emulated by HHH1.
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>     HHH1(DDD);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Shows that DDD emulated by HHH and DDD emulated by
>>>> HHH1 diverges as soon as HHH begins emulating itself
>>>> emulating DDD.
>>>>
>>>> *From the execution trace of HHH1(DDD) shown below*
>>>> DDD emulated by HHH1              DDD emulated by HHH
>>>> [00002183] push ebp               [00002183] push ebp
>>>> [00002184] mov ebp,esp            [00002184] mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00002186] push 00002183 ; DDD    [00002186] push 00002183 ; DDD
>>>> [0000218b] call 000015c3 ; HHH    [0000218b] call 000015c3 ; HHH
>>>> *HHH1 emulates DDD once then HHH emulates DDD once, these match*
>>>>
>>>> The next instruction of DDD that HHH emulates is at
>>>> the machine address of 00002183.
>>>>
>>>> The next instruction of DDD that HHH1 emulates is at
>>>> the machine address of 00002190.
>>>>
>>>> 00002183 != 00002190
>>>>
>>>> _DDD()
>>>> [00002183] 55             push ebp
>>>> [00002184] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00002186] 6883210000     push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000218b] e833f4ffff     call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>>> [00002190] 83c404         add esp,+04
>>>> [00002193] 5d             pop ebp
>>>> [00002194] c3             ret
>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002194]
>>>>
>>>> _main()
>>>> [000021a3] 55             push ebp
>>>> [000021a4] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
>>>> [000021a6] 6883210000     push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [000021ab] e843f3ffff     call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
>>>> [000021b0] 83c404         add esp,+04
>>>> [000021b3] 33c0           xor eax,eax
>>>> [000021b5] 5d             pop ebp
>>>> [000021b6] c3             ret
>>>> Size in bytes:(0020) [000021b6]
>>>>
>>>>    machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>>>>    address   address   data      code       language
>>>>   ========  ========  ========  ========== =============
>>>> <main is executed>
>>>> [000021a3][0010382d][00000000] 55         push ebp      ; main()
>>>> [000021a4][0010382d][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; main()
>>>> [000021a6][00103829][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [000021ab][00103825][000021b0] e843f3ffff call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
>>>> </main is executed>
>>>>
>>>> New slave_stack at:1038d1
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138d9
>>>>
>>>> <DDD emulated by HHH1>
>>>> [00002183][001138c9][001138cd] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH1
>>>> [00002184][001138c9][001138cd] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH1
>>>> [00002186][001138c5][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000218b][001138c1][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>>> </DDD emulated by HHH1>
>>>>
>>>> New slave_stack at:14e2f9
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:15e301
>>>>
>>>> <DDD emulated by HHH>
>>>> [00002183][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH[0]
>>>> [00002184][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH[0]
>>>> [00002186][0015e2ed][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000218b][0015e2e9][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>>> <DDD emulated by HHH>
>>>>
>>>> New slave_stack at:198d21  DDD emulated by HHH
>>>> *This is the beginning of the divergence of the behavior*
>>>> *HHH is emulating itself emulating DDD, HHH1 never does that*
>>>>
>>>> <DDD emulated by HHH emulating itself>
>>>> [00002183][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH[1]
>>>> [00002184][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH[1]
>>>> [00002186][001a8d15][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000218b][001a8d11][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>>> </DDD emulated by HHH emulating itself>
>>>>
>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>> HHH returns to caller
>>>>
>>>> <DDD emulated by HHH1>
>>>> [00002190][001138c9][001138cd] 83c404     add esp,+04 ; DDD of HHH1
>>>> [00002193][001138cd][000015a8] 5d         pop ebp     ; DDD of HHH1
>>>> [00002194][001138d1][0003a980] c3         ret         ; DDD of HHH1
>>>> </DDD emulated by HHH1>
>>>>
>>>> <main is executed>
>>>> [000021b0][0010382d][00000000] 83c404     add esp,+04 ; main()
>>>> [000021b3][0010382d][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax ; main()
>>>> [000021b5][00103831][00000018] 5d         pop ebp     ; main()
>>>> [000021b6][00103835][00000000] c3         ret         ; main()
>>>> </main is executed>
>>>> Number of Instructions Executed(352831) == 5266 Pages
>>>>
>>>
>>> Lean Lisp first, ideally with Scheme. Go get Concrete Abstractions
>>> and learn about recursivity and taill call optimization.
>>
>> Tail optimization would at best convert recursive emulation
>> into an infinite loop.
> 
> Only for the DDD that calls the HHH that never aborts.
> 
> Sorry, but you admission to the facts that show that all your claims are 
> just lies based on the category error of you not making HHH actually a 
> fixed programs, and thus DDD isn't a program, and thus not something 
> that CAN be correctly simulated, just shows that you don't care about 
> what the truth actualy is.
> 
>>
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>>    return;
>> }
>>
>> DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its
>> own "return" statement final halt state, thus is correctly
>> rejected by HHH as non-halting.
> 
> Something that can not happen by your stipulations,
> 
> Sorry, you have ADMITTED that this statement can't be true by admitting 
> that DDD isn't amoundg the category of things that can be simulated.
> 
> 
>>
>> int DD()
>> {
>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>    return Halt_Status;
>> }
>>
>> The point of all of this is that the halting problem's
>> counter-example input is also correctly rejected as
>> non-halting thus refuting the conventional HP proof.
>>
> 
> No it isn't, and the fact that you have admitted to the facts that show 
> that you have just been lying all these years about your system being 
> the equivalent of the halting problem proof, just shows how little you 
> care about truth.
> 

int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}

HHH(DD) correctly rejects its input as specifying
a non-halting sequence of configurations.
DD *is* the HP proof counter-example input.

> You arguement effective begins with a statement with as much truth as 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========