| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<65e966d956f6fde5dbe8662eed7c2013b34fd6a9@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 21:45:11 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <65e966d956f6fde5dbe8662eed7c2013b34fd6a9@i2pn2.org> References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me> <bc6f0f045212bdfb7f7d883426873a09e37789ea@i2pn2.org> <1005u6v$3cpt2$1@dont-email.me> <1006oi9$3l93f$1@dont-email.me> <1007kan$3qb7l$8@dont-email.me> <1009n2d$b9ol$1@dont-email.me> <100ag73$g1r8$1@dont-email.me> <100c83u$tspg$1@dont-email.me> <100ctuc$121rs$1@dont-email.me> <100d5b7$13m1e$1@dont-email.me> <221167c1bbedbbda1934b12f6b2c72de2c3a1f78@i2pn2.org> <100dckr$1586e$1@dont-email.me> <c5c825970bebea6bd8bfde7077f7ffc5ba0c30f5@i2pn2.org> <100dedr$15dil$3@dont-email.me> <771e0f3f36c9914146f675bc9e2c1c0e7903c116@i2pn2.org> <100dfc8$15qbo$1@dont-email.me> <35c9fb020e868823c3e46c006d9ac4698eaf4f82@i2pn2.org> <100dl6g$16vdn$1@dont-email.me> <f02a2fb26f6e1dedd29638f9b42befaab4781f17@i2pn2.org> <100dst7$18epo$1@dont-email.me> <100f18f$1iree$1@dont-email.me> <100gvv6$22oen$2@dont-email.me> <100h9le$24iha$1@dont-email.me> <100i43k$292ko$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 02:05:46 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1242548"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: <100i43k$292ko$2@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 On 5/20/25 10:37 AM, olcott wrote: > On 5/20/2025 2:06 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2025-05-20 04:20:54 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022> >>> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its >>> input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D >>> would never stop running unless aborted then >>> >>> Do you understand that we are only evaluating whether >>> or not HHH/DDD meets this above criteria? >> >> I do understand that the meaning of the behaviour is not mentioned >> in the creteria and is therefore irrelevant, an obvious consequence >> of which is that your "WRONG!" above is false. >> > > *H correctly simulates its input D until* > specifies that HHH must simulate DDD according > to the meaning of the rules of the x86 language. > > The meaning of every step of the behavior is > precisely specified by the x86 language. > > _DDD() > [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping > [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping > [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD > [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) > [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 > [00002182] 5d pop ebp > [00002183] c3 ret > Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] > > *H correctly simulates its input D* > 00002172 00002173 00002175 0000217a > H correctly simulates itself simulating DDD > 00002172 00002173 00002175 0000217a So, UUU only simulates the first 4 instuctions and then gives up. To say it goes farther is just admittng that it doesn't do it correctly. > > *until H correctly determines that its simulated D* > *would never stop running unless aborted* No, it gave up after 4 instructions, and then tried again. Or, are you saying the "correct simulation" of the call HHH NOT TO keep simulating the code of HHH. > > H sees DDD call the same function with the same > parameter and there are no conditional branch > instructions from the beginning of DDD to calling > HHH(DDD) again. This repeating pattern proves > non-termination. > > But that isn't a correct criteria, not unless HHH *IS* just a pure simulator, which means it CAN'T abort, so you are just demonstrating that you are just lying about what you are doing.