Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.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: Can any pathological input thwart a simulating abort decider?
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 22:44:25 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <uttcq9$32apk$13@i2pn2.org>
References: <utkjd0$335kr$1@dont-email.me> <utm7u7$3iaut$1@dont-email.me>
 <utmn5h$3lnmi$5@dont-email.me> <utmppq$3mgs3$1@dont-email.me>
 <utmuq0$3ncb0$5@dont-email.me> <utn05t$3o86u$2@dont-email.me>
 <utn1ed$3od3s$2@dont-email.me> <utn8mb$3q1mb$2@dont-email.me>
 <utnadr$3ql3o$2@dont-email.me> <utnkh0$3t2rs$2@dont-email.me>
 <utsehd$17q02$3@dont-email.me> <utt28e$32apk$8@i2pn2.org>
 <utt4fk$1d2ks$1@dont-email.me> <utt50h$32apl$4@i2pn2.org>
 <utt5ot$1dbci$1@dont-email.me> <utt6de$32apl$5@i2pn2.org>
 <utt8c1$1dv6f$1@dont-email.me> <uttafr$32apl$7@i2pn2.org>
 <uttbbb$1eg0e$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 02:44:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3222324"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <uttbbb$1eg0e$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 12189
Lines: 277

On 3/25/24 10:19 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/25/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/25/24 9:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2024 7:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/25/24 8:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/25/2024 7:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/25/24 8:22 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/25/2024 6:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/25/24 2:07 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 5:19 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 23/03/24 20:26, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 1:57 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 23.mrt.2024 om 17:53 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 11:31 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 23.mrt.2024 om 17:08 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 9:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 23.mrt.2024 om 14:58 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 4:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 22.mrt.2024 om 19:41 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H is a simulating abort decider that supposed to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly determine whether or not it needs to abort
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the simulation of any pathological inputs that are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempting to thwart this abort decision.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H must abort every simulated input that would not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise halt to prevent its own non-termination.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a self-evident verified fact that every H(D,D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that decides to abort its simulated D(D) is correct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in doing so because this does prevent its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-termination.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is self-evident that when H is programmed to abort 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and return false, then [the simulated] D will 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> immediately stop running never having reached its last 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction to halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As can be seen above, if H returns false in line 03, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then D will go to line 04 and line 06 and halt (unless 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aborted).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You still do not understand that functions called in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recursion never return to their caller, thus must have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grossly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exaggerated your programming skill.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even a beginner in C will see that if the simulated D, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using the H that is programmed to abort and return false, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will continue with line 04 then line 06 and halt (unless 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aborted).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the strawman deception we are only talking about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fact that the D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own line 06 and halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Denying a verified fact is not a strong rebuttal.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the simulated D calls its simulator this call cannot 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return to its caller. The relationship between the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and its simulator makes a call D(D) to its own simulator 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> isomorphic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to infinite recursion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is exactly the relation with the simulator that aborts, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which makes that also the simulated H is programmed to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abort and return false.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Olcott is again contradicting himself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That the directly executed D(D) is an entirely different 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instance
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that does not have this same pathological relationship is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> summed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up in your own reply.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not talking about a directly executed D, but a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated D!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not talking about a directly executed D, but a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated D!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not talking about a directly executed D, but a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated D!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This simulated D halts (unless aborted)!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its own line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06 and halt. That you say otherwise proves your insufficient
>>>>>>>>>>>>> programming skill.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems too difficult for olcott to see, what even a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginner sees, that H, programmed to return false, also 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> returns false when simulated (unless aborted).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I worked at the US Army Corps of engineers an independent
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contractor rated my programs as the best quality of all of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> programs that they reviewed and they reviewed all of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> programs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If true, I am very sorry for olcott, that he is no longer 
>>>>>>>>>>>> able to see, what even a beginner sees, that H, programmed 
>>>>>>>>>>>> to return false, also returns false when simulated (unless 
>>>>>>>>>>>> aborted).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone with sufficient programming skill can see that this 
>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>> verified fact:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> *D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its own 
>>>>>>>>>>> final state*
>>>>>>>>>>> *at line 06 in an infinite number of steps of correct 
>>>>>>>>>>> simulation*
>>>>>>>>>>> Some of these people might lie about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Everyone with sufficient programming skill can see that H is 
>>>>>>>>>> not defined as part of program D, and if you define H inside 
>>>>>>>>>> program D, then it might be possible to tell whether it 
>>>>>>>>>> reaches line 06 or not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *It is stipulated that H must correctly simulate 1 to ∞ steps 
>>>>>>>>> of D*
>>>>>>>>> Every other detail about H is unspecified because it is 
>>>>>>>>> irrelevant.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then your stipulation is just ILLOGICAL, as a given H can only 
>>>>>>>> do one thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None-the-less they all share the common property that they either
>>>>>>> run forever or abort the simulation of their input. All of the other
>>>>>>> differences don't make and damn difference at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But that isn't a simple property, so you are creating a FALSE 
>>>>>> DICHOTOMY.
>>>>>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========