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
Subject: Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the
 semantics of the x86 language
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 11:25:30 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <e48d3566931ba5d9a525377407c7446ab31fc8ec@i2pn2.org>
References: <v5pbjf$55h$1@dont-email.me> <v5r5q9$ekvf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5s40h$jvgt$1@dont-email.me> <v5sbpt$1kfbr$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v5sjsa$msl0$1@dont-email.me> <v5skc9$1kfbr$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v5smuk$n7a2$1@dont-email.me> <v5sorr$1kfbr$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v5sp4v$nnko$1@dont-email.me> <v5sr4t$1kfbq$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v5srjn$o1o0$1@dont-email.me> <v5ssaq$1kfbq$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v5st66$o7ss$1@dont-email.me>
 <c932a0dabd6ef1285bc553269e2d61b7d9eabc2b@i2pn2.org>
 <v665t0$2oun1$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 15:25:30 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2132707"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v665t0$2oun1$10@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3071
Lines: 39

On 7/4/24 8:51 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/4/2024 6:05 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sun, 30 Jun 2024 19:27:50 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 6/30/2024 7:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/30/24 8:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> THIS SEQUENCE CANNOT POSSIBLY RETURN WHY PERSISTENTLY LIE ABOUT IT?
>>>>>
>>>> But it does, just after H gives up its simulation.
>>>> You have even show that with a simulation.
>>
>>>    DDD correctly emulated by HHH calls an emulated HHH(DDD)
>>> that emulates its own DDD that calls an emulated HHH(DDD)
>>> that is either aborted at some point never returning or hits
>>> out-of-memory error never returning
>> Running out of memory is only a physical constraint of no concern
>> to the theoretical behaviour.
>>
> 
> None-the-less it makes it totally clear that DDD correctly simulated
> by HHH DOES NOT HALT.
> 

No, because THIS HHH didn't run out of memery.


Your argument just shows you are trying to play a shell game.

The problem is that you want DDD to be a "template" that changes as you 
change HHH, but templates don't HAVE "Behavior" only the instances of 
them that are programs do.

I suppose you could try to work on an extension that just like 
"Termination Analysis" looks at the behavior of a specific program, but 
over all inputs, so broadens the halting problem, you could work on a 
Template version over all instances of the template, but you will first 
need to figure how to define what is a valid function to make an 
instance on, as any template that calls a function will become 
non-halting if that function is just itself non-halting, so the field 
becomes trivial.