Path: ...!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: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H
Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 16:30:07 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 149
Message-ID: <v18tov$22tig$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v18f9e$5asq$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v18lj3$20ukn$1@dont-email.me> <v18sq6$5asr$9@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 05 May 2024 23:30:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="541e9246f979204e7e622a92e4a7a032";
	logging-data="2192976"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+VY0CBogOEZ0vIzs7UbeS7"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:X5PRueTlvWS+XWmG/0XTAXjIt48=
In-Reply-To: <v18sq6$5asr$9@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6585

On 5/5/2024 4:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/5/24 3:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/5/2024 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/5/24 1:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Except that the pattern it uses is incorrect, since H(D,D) using this 
>>> "pattern" says that D(D) will not halt, where, when main calls D(D), 
>>> it does return/halt, so H is just incorrect.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Nope, PROVEN WRONG AND THE PROOF IGNORED, PO have even claimed that 
>>> it would be trivial to show the error in the proof, but hasn't done 
>>> it, showing that he doesn't actually have an answer to the 
>>> refutation, and thus by just repeating a statment that is know to at 
>>> least potentially have a problem as if it was just clearly true is 
>>> just a pathological lie.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Except that the proof shows that you are not smart enough to think of 
>>> some of the ways arround the problem (even though those methods were 
>>> discussed a long time back)
>>>
>>
>> The above execution trace proves the behavior of each D simulated by
>> each H of the elements of the infinite set of H/D pairs where this D
>> calls that H.
> 
> Nope, your problem is you stop simulating at the call to H and then 
> resort to incorrect logic to try to figure out what happens next.
> 

I have to usually tell you the exactly same thing several
hundreds of times before you notice that I ever said it once.

We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where
D is simulated by the same H that D calls.

We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where
D is simulated by the same H that D calls.

We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where
D is simulated by the same H that D calls.

We are talking about the infinite set of H/D pairs where
D is simulated by the same H that D calls.

Elements of this set of H/D pairs simulate from 1 to infinite steps of D 
and each one of them does this in an infinite number of different ways.

There are an infinite number of different ways for H to simulate
1 step of D.

> You are just stuck in the wrong ideas about H.
> 
>>
>> If you are claiming that you have some top secret proof that shows
>> the above execution trace is incorrect I am taking this as the empty
>> claims of evidence of election fraud that no one has ever seen.
>>
> 
> But not "Top Secret" as openly published here, and it was using ideas 
> that have been discussed here in the past.
> 
> 
> 
>> *I will perpetually hound you for this evidence*
>> *I will perpetually hound you for this evidence*
>> *I will perpetually hound you for this evidence*
> 
> By LYING that it was not presented.
> 
> 
>>
>> This same method worked on an election denier, they deleted all
>> of their claims of election fraud and left.
> 
> So, are you willing to put up or shut up?
> 
> If I can show you how to write a valid C program H that can correctly 
> simulates this D above (that calls my H), will you abandon your repeated 
> claims that you can do this?
> 
>>
>>>>
>>>> *Shown by ordinary software engineering* When the directly executed
>>>> H(D,D) aborts simulating its input then all of the nested simulations
>>>> (if any) immediately totally stop running and no simulated H ever
>>>> returns any value to any simulated D.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right, but that doesn't change the behavor of the correctly and 
>>> completely simulated input or the direct execution of the program 
>>> descirbed.
>>>
>>>>  From this we can definitely know that every D(D) of the infinite set
>>>> of H/D pairs where this D(D) is simulated by the H that this D(D) calls
>>>> that this D(D) presents non-halting behavior to this H.
>>>
>>> Nope. And the conclusion doesn't even follow from the incorrect premise.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D*
>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just LIES.
>>
> 

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer