Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Categorically exhaustive reasoning applied to the decision to
 abort
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:53:14 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 210
Message-ID: <uujqgp$t4$1@dont-email.me>
References: <utlf69$39fl1$1@dont-email.me> <utlff5$3997r$3@dont-email.me>
 <utlgg1$2o1am$20@i2pn2.org> <utlirq$3dsl2$2@dont-email.me>
 <utmo5e$2plc2$8@i2pn2.org> <utmqu6$3msk5$1@dont-email.me>
 <utnmqm$3tjdn$1@dont-email.me> <utnoks$3ttm3$2@dont-email.me>
 <utns99$2rkld$3@i2pn2.org> <uto24n$3vtt8$2@dont-email.me>
 <utpd7m$dibu$1@dont-email.me> <utsv72$1bgkl$6@dont-email.me>
 <utu29i$1n8qn$1@dont-email.me> <utumq5$1rsiu$5@dont-email.me>
 <uu0p2r$2opup$1@dont-email.me> <uu1911$2seum$2@dont-email.me>
 <uu3vod$3krqk$1@dont-email.me> <uu42t0$3ldlj$3@dont-email.me>
 <uu67j1$8ksq$1@dont-email.me> <uu6j3a$b6gs$2@dont-email.me>
 <uu8dr3$rukj$1@dont-email.me> <uu950v$114hv$2@dont-email.me>
 <uub8u3$1k9b3$1@dont-email.me> <uubrp1$1r54k$1@dont-email.me>
 <uuc1pf$1skhe$1@dont-email.me> <uuc2as$1smok$1@dont-email.me>
 <uuc30i$1smok$2@dont-email.me> <uudqfu$2ckr5$1@dont-email.me>
 <uueho9$2hsd5$1@dont-email.me> <uugdun$339t7$1@dont-email.me>
 <uuh58o$38mcp$1@dont-email.me> <uuj2mh$3q6u1$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 14:53:14 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bfbe230f41d733c8e8d14e4fa12c421a";
	logging-data="932"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19VUCrts7JBhwtz/dvFJZ0/"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CxrahRYJ1rJif7TzB99I820juZI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <uuj2mh$3q6u1$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 10918

On 4/3/2024 3:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-04-02 14:38:16 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 4/2/2024 3:00 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-01 14:52:57 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 4/1/2024 3:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-03-31 16:29:06 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/31/2024 11:17 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/31/2024 11:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-31 14:25:37 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2024 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-30 13:45:03 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/30/2024 2:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-29 14:26:50 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/29/2024 6:10 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-28 15:38:08 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2024 9:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-27 14:04:17 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2024 4:32 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-26 14:41:08 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/26/2024 3:50 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-25 22:52:18 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2024 9:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-03-24 02:11:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 7:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/24 7:29 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2024 5:58 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/03/24 16:02, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) H(D,D) that DOES abort its simulation is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      (ABOUT THIS ABORT DECISION)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      because it would halt and all deciders 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> must always halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be a decider it has to give an answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be a halt decider it has to give an answer 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is the same as whether the direct 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution of its input would halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That would entail that H must report on 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the behavior that H actually sees thus 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> violate the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition of a decider that must compute the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mapping from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its inputs...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are just showing yourself to be a stupid liar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where in the DEFINITION of Compute the Mapping 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the Input to the Mapped Output does it say 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the decider has to be able to "see" that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> property of the input?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In order to compute the mapping from an input 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there must be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some basis that is directly provided by this input.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If no such basis is in the input the problem has 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no soution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int sum(int x, int y){ return x + y; }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sum(3,4) is not allowed to report on the sum of 5 + 6
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even if you really really believe that it should.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your and my beliefs don't matter. Testers call the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> function with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> various pairs of inputs and compare the result to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the specification.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the result is not what the specification requires 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then the function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is wrong and needs be fixed or rejected.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is enough information for sum(3,4) to compute 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the sum of 3+4.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is NOT enough information for sum(3,4) to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compute the sum of 5+6.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is enough information for H1(D,D) to compute 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halts(D,D).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is NOT enough information for H(D,D) to compute 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halts(D,D).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is enough information to determine whether the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result is as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required by the specification.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This specification only requires a mapping from H(D,D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to Halts(Simulated_by_H(D,D)) and it gets that one 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D(D) does not halt from the POV of H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What "this pecification"? This means the one you refer 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or point to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but you didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every implementation of H(D,D) that simulates its input 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> must abort
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this simulation or never itself halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main() { D(D); }   is not a D simulated by H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main() { H(D,D); } is a D simulated by H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does not answer what "this specification" means above.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *THIS SPECIFICATION*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every implementation of H(D,D) that simulates its input 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> must abort
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this simulation or never itself halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure you want to allow that H(D,D) may run un a loop 
>>>>>>>>>>>> and never
>>>>>>>>>>>> halt and never continue the simulation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So you didn't understand the: *must abort this simulation* 
>>>>>>>>>>> part ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I did. I asked whether whether you really mean all that "never 
>>>>>>>>>> iself
>>>>>>>>>> halt" means.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 01 void D(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to void function
>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>> 03   H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>> 04   return;
>>>>>>>>> 05 }
>>>>>>>>> 06
>>>>>>>>> 07 void main()
>>>>>>>>> 08 {
>>>>>>>>> 09   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>> 10 }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>>>> Line 09: 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.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========