Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: Wed, 8 May 2024 15:37:51 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 132
Message-ID: <v1gnqv$5ren$1@dont-email.me>
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$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1eofe$cp5s$1@i2pn2.org> <v1eomj$3nb4c$3@dont-email.me>
 <v1epdo$cp5s$8@i2pn2.org> <v1eqej$3nnch$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1fo8k$dt8i$2@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 May 2024 22:37:51 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="883a48edd812fc46b7908dfbe69f1e37";
	logging-data="191959"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/MMkp9GeNvA64+/A/pR60m"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TCu3u4aTe1rHrp0hS8OIDgi7iRs=
In-Reply-To: <v1fo8k$dt8i$2@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6290

On 5/8/2024 6:39 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/7/24 11:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2024 9:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/7/24 10:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2024 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/7/24 11:40 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> 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).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These H/D pairs can be enumerated by the one to ∞ simulated steps 
>>>>>> of D and involve zero to ∞ recursive simulations of H simulating 
>>>>>> itself simulating D(D). Every time Lines 1,2,3 are simulated again 
>>>>>> defines
>>>>>> one more level of recursive simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, and I can make an H that simulates its D to the final state.
>>>>
>>>> Liar
>>>>
>>>
>>> Was PROVEN.
>>>
>>> Are you willing to put up or shut up, or don't you beleive your own 
>>> claim?
>>>
>>
>> You are simply lying just like the pillow guy.
>> It was never proven and you know it was never proven.
>> The pillow guy is having all of his assets confiscated.
>>
> 
> Right, because he at least had the strength of belief to put up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> If it was ever proven you could write is down again
>> or give a time/date stamp. That you refuse to do this
>> is sufficient evidence to conclude that you are lying.
> 
> Yes, I could, but it
> 

would conclusively prove that Richard has been lying all along about 
this point.

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