Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.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: Olcott doesn't understand logic
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 10:18:25 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v1labh$kf53$1@i2pn2.org>
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>
 <v1dtdv$3dqg4$1@dont-email.me> <v1du2i$3dt7u$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1fetd$3s7jo$1@dont-email.me> <v1ft42$3vdau$2@dont-email.me>
 <-5Gdnf-nQvstC6b7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v1gid8$4ilc$1@dont-email.me> <v1h9eu$9faf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1iqli$nsva$1@dont-email.me> <v1k0ts$iuna$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v1k381$14mbi$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 14:18:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="670883"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v1k381$14mbi$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 9563
Lines: 194

On 5/9/24 11:10 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/9/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/9/24 11:38 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2024 8:38 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>> On 8/05/24 21:05, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/8/2024 10:13 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/05/2024 14:01, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/8/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-07 19:05:54 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/7/2024 1:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 07.mei.2024 om 17:40 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is this the definition of the infinite set of H? We can think 
>>>>>>>>>> of many more simulations that only these.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No-one can possibly show one element of this set where D(D) 
>>>>>>>>> reaches
>>>>>>>>> past its own line 03.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If H is a decider of any kind then the D build from it reaches 
>>>>>>>> its line
>>>>>>>> 4 as numberd above. Whether the simulation of D by H reaches 
>>>>>>>> that line
>>>>>>>> is another question.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *My fully operational code proves otherwise*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I seems like you guys don't have a clue about how infinite
>>>>>>> recursion works. You can run the code and see that I am correct.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have one concrete instance as fully operational code.
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>> line 555 u32 HH(ptr P, ptr I) its input in on
>>>>>>> line 932 int DD(int (*x)())
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HH is completely broken - it uses a global variable which is 
>>>>>> allows HH to detect whether it is the outer HH or a nested 
>>>>>> (simulated) HH. As a result, the nested HH behaves completely 
>>>>>> differently to the outer HH - I mean /completely/ differently: it 
>>>>>> goes through a totally separate "I am called in nested mode" code 
>>>>>> path!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The encoding of HH is not the pure function that it needs to be to
>>>>> be a computable function.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Maybe you can settle this*
>>>>>
>>>>> The disagreement is entirely over an enormously much simpler thing.
>>>>> The disagreement is that Richard says that a D simulated by H could
>>>>> reach past its own line 03 and halt.
>>>>
>>>> Here's the proof:
>>>>
>>>> 1. A simulation always produces an identical execution trace to the 
>>>> direct execution.
>>>
>>> *When pathological self-reference is involved this is counter-factual*
>>> That no one can possibly show the steps of how D simulated by H possibly
>>> reach line 06 of H proves this.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Richard tried to get away with D never simulated by H as an example
>>> of D simulated by H:
>>
>> Nope, you are looking at the WRONG message, and I have told you this 
>> multiple times.
> 
> Message-ID: <v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>
> *When you interpret*
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========