Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally? POE
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 23:07:38 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 322
Message-ID: <v0n6ea$1hdqe$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v0k4jc$laej$1@dont-email.me> <v0k6eo$2djoe$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v0k70f$lpet$1@dont-email.me> <v0k9co$2djoe$11@i2pn2.org>
 <v0ka8h$qb8e$1@dont-email.me> <v0kb4e$2djoe$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v0kcio$qqsq$1@dont-email.me> <v0kftr$2djof$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v0kgph$rhfr$1@dont-email.me> <v0li19$2g492$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0ljuk$12q0o$2@dont-email.me> <v0lkpi$2g492$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v0lllg$135k7$1@dont-email.me> <v0m1bh$2gl1f$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m2jd$166o1$2@dont-email.me> <v0m3t5$2gl1e$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m46m$16k3h$2@dont-email.me> <v0m5a9$2gl1e$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m6o5$172p4$5@dont-email.me> <v0m83f$2gl1f$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v0miig$19rb3$1@dont-email.me> <v0mkfg$2hf3s$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 06:07:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="73fb146966bd3083c21813597b100895";
	logging-data="1619790"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX184VLsVVzc3I7ccFNrHN5Ju"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:yULshzI/HbcWlaWtcnxzHOPsIwA=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v0mkfg$2hf3s$1@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 15621

On 4/28/2024 6:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 4/28/24 6:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/28/2024 2:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 4/28/24 3:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/28/2024 1:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 4/28/24 2:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 1:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 1:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 12:34 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 9:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/24 9:45 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/28/2024 8:13 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 11:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 10:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 9:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/2024 7:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/27/24 8:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can D simulated by H terminate normally?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The x86utm operating system based on an open 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source x86 emulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This system enables one C function to execute 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another C function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in debug step mode. When H simulates D it creates 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a separate process
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> context for D with its own memory, stack and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual registers. H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is able to simulate D simulating itself, thus the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only limit to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recursive simulations is RAM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // The following is written in C
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 typedef int (*ptr)(); // pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 int H(ptr x, ptr y)    // uses x86 emulator to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulate its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14   D(D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 15 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Execution Trace
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 14: main() invokes D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keeps repeating (unless aborted)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 06: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simulation invariant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own line 09.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it dead obvious to everyone here when examining 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the execution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trace of lines 14 and 06 above that D correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by H cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibly terminate normally by reaching its own 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line 09?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except that you fail to mention that you have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admitted that you are NOT working on the Halting 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Problem, despite trying to use terminology similar 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to it, but having stipulated definition that are in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conflict with computaiton theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note, "keeps repeating (unless aborted)" is a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misleading statement, as your H will ALWAYS abort 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this input, and thus it NEVER will "Keep repeating".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't like me pointing out the problem because 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you prefer to be able to LIE to people about what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You work has NOTHING to do with Halting, as your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H/D are not even turing equivalenet to their 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> namesakes in the proof you like to mention.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the exact verbatim post and the first 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> respondent agreed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and immediately noticed that I was referring to the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I will go with what I said, you just don't know C 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well and want to keep that hidden behind rhetoric 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and denigration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you couch it to SOUND like the halting problem, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it isn't as you have FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning of terms.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus, to act like it is, just makes you a LIAR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halting is NOT about H being able to simulate it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input to the final state. PERIOD.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I could show how it is but you prefer to believe 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise and refuse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to go through the detailed steps required.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you CAN'T, because you have FUNDAMENTALLY changed 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the question, sinc eyou claim that even though D(D) 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halts, that H(D,D) is correct to say not halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not my error it is your indoctrination.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, How is H(D,D) saying false correct if D(D) Halts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You refuse to go through the mandatory steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU are the only one that says they are "Manditory".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That doesn't make them so for me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU refuse to explain how a Halting Turing Machine can be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly decider as "Non-Halting".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your "excuses" all seem to boil down to you just need to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lie about what you are actually doing and that you refuse 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to even learn what the actual rules and language of what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are saying you are doing are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SInce the DEFINITION of the quesiton that H, the Halt 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decider, is to answer is if the computation describe by 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its input (that is D(D) ) will halt when run.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have to hide behind obfuscation, blusgter and LIES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since you don't seem to know that actual meaning of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words you use, as you have even occationally admitted, it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is clear who knows what they are talking about and who 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will also point out that you have effectively admitted 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that your statements are unsopported as you always fail 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to provide actual references to accepted ground for your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is psychotic that people really believes that the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> principle of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explosion is valid inference even though there is zero 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========