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,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H ...
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 21:28:03 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v1h8r3$flc1$5@i2pn2.org>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v1avuv$2lks2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1b7gl$2ndka$1@dont-email.me> <v1cla9$34iis$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1d2mi$9f72$11@i2pn2.org> <v1di1h$3b2m5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1fe59$3s2pt$1@dont-email.me> <v1fsr4$3vdau$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 01:28:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="513409"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v1fsr4$3vdau$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 6120
Lines: 136

On 5/8/24 8:57 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/8/2024 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-05-07 15:40:32 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 5/7/2024 6:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/24 3:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-05-06 18:28:37 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/6/2024 11:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-05-05 17:02:25 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you say "every H/D pair" you should specify which set of pairs
>>>>>>> you are talking about. As you don't, your words don't mean anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every H/D pair in the universe where D(D) is simulated by the
>>>>>> same H(D,D) that D(D) calls. This involves 1 to ∞ steps of D
>>>>>> and also includes zero to ∞ recursive simulations where H
>>>>>> H simulates itself simulating D(D).
>>>>>
>>>>> "In the universe" is not a set. In typical set theories like ZFC there
>>>>> is no universal set.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This template defines an infinite set of finite string H/D pairs 
>>> where each D(D) that is simulated by H(D,D) also calls this same H(D,D).
>>
>> No, it does not. D does not know which H simulates it or even whther is
>> simulated at all. D calls the one whose name is H. The association of D
>> with the H of the same pair, if desired, must be done outside of D.
>>
> 
> The template specifies that D(D) is calling the same H(D,D)
> that invokes it. All instances conform to the template.

But that isn't the LINZ template that you claim to be following.

That machine doesn't use whoever is deciding it, but ALWAYS the one H 
that it was built to refute.

You are just proving that your life is just built on LIES.

> 
> I have one concrete instance as fully operational code.
> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
> line 555 u32 HH(ptr P, ptr I) its input in on
> line 932 int DD(int (*x)())
> 
> 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 }
> 
> The above template specifies an infinite set of finite string H/D pairs
> where each D(D) that is simulated by H(D,D) also calls this same H(D,D).
> 
> I have one concrete fully operational instance of H/D pairs so
> we know that more than zero of them exist.
> 
> I can adapt this one concrete instance to be the 7 shown below and
> we can extrapolate the trend from there:
> 
> 1st element of H/D pairs 1 step of D is simulated by H
> 2nd element of H/D pairs 2 steps of D are simulated by H
> 3rd element of H/D pairs 3 steps of D are simulated by H
> 
> 4th element of H/D pairs 4 steps of D are simulated by H
> this begins the first recursive simulation at line 01
> 
> 5th element of H/D pairs 5 steps of D are simulated by
> next step of the first recursive simulation at line 02
> 
> 6th element of H/D pairs 6 steps of D are simulated by
> last step of the first recursive simulation at line 03
> 
> 7th element of H/D pairs 7 steps of D are simulated by H
> this begins the second recursive simulation at line 01
> 
> 8th element of H/D pairs 8 steps of D are simulated by H
> next step of the second recursive simulation at line 02
> 
> 9th element of H/D pairs 9 steps of D are simulated by H
> this ends the second recursive simulation before line 03
> 
>