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: Linz's proofs and other undecidable decision problems [LP as
 basis] [Mike Terry](apology)
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 12:04:45 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 120
Message-ID: <v1o8fe$250p7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <877cj0g0bw.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <uromc0$5stj$1@dont-email.me>
 <uroob5$6c32$1@dont-email.me> <urpn7p$fetm$3@dont-email.me>
 <urq96s$m03b$9@dont-email.me> <urqmeg$p5i6$1@dont-email.me>
 <urqmv9$p6un$1@dont-email.me>
 <c2c69a25eecce5dc88cc3a979ee5cf9e4af2b67f.camel@gmail.com>
 <urqqo0$q1gd$1@dont-email.me>
 <94aaf99a4347e3fce0773fdd12001c3f03e3c1ea.camel@gmail.com>
 <urqrlk$q7ed$1@dont-email.me>
 <65a324cfb867c0219344ca9a767846930119784c.camel@gmail.com>
 <urqsr6$qgjj$1@dont-email.me> <urqviq$qrnj$2@dont-email.me>
 <a24a41a5fd0631d7dcca11af5bdc9819e3812cc7.camel@gmail.com>
 <urr0g7$r6eq$1@dont-email.me> <urregj$cbpo$2@i2pn2.org>
 <urrirc$12055$3@dont-email.me> <urrkup$cbpo$7@i2pn2.org>
 <urrrnf$13jnk$1@dont-email.me>
 <ROKdnSw4i6cUjn_4nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <urt4qb$1bs5i$3@dont-email.me>
 <rLmcnQQ3-N_tvH_4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v1loa5$1g957$1@dont-email.me> <v1n8jr$1u6so$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1o526$245mu$1@dont-email.me>
 <3hOdnStJ9KglAKL7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 19:04:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4d0dff08c358270f818af19f82bcfe8c";
	logging-data="2261799"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19l7qqHQ2ETj2PD9ZLjJ2db"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hCUiPKyH0mUkjSXhUoUawyR3JT8=
In-Reply-To: <3hOdnStJ9KglAKL7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6713

On 5/11/2024 11:32 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 11/05/2024 17:06, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/11/2024 3:00 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-10 18:16:37 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 3/1/2024 12:41 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Obviously a simulator has access to the internal state (tape 
>>>>> contents etc.) of the simulated machine.  No problem there.
>>>>>
>>>>> What isn't allowed is the simulated machine altering its own 
>>>>> behaviour by accessing data outside of its own state.  (I.e. 
>>>>> accessing data from its parent simulators state.)
>>>>>
>>>>> While an "active-simulator" [my own term] is at liberty to combine
>>>>> straight simulation with add-on "enhancements" that extend the
>>>>> functionality of the simulated machine, in doing so it would no
>>>>> longer be a simulator in the sense you need it to be.  So you
>>>>> mustn't do this!
>>>
>>> In principle an incorrect simulation is permissible. However, to prove
>>> that the result inferred from an incorrect simulation is correct may
>>> be impossible.
>>>
>>
>> Within the conventional terms-of-the-art of {termination analyzer}
>> and {simulator} an incorrect simulation is forbidden.
>>
>>>> *You did not provide complete reasoning justifying this proclamation*
>>>> *You did not provide complete reasoning justifying this proclamation*
>>>> *You did not provide complete reasoning justifying this proclamation*
>>>
>>> The provided reasoning is sufficient. You can continue reasoning from
>>> that if you want more.
>>>
>>
>> *He is SIMPLY WRONG and when he tries*
>> *to justify what he said he will fail*
>>
>> Any pure x86 emulator or UTM can have the added functionality
>> of watching every state change of its simulated input without
>> changing the simulated steps of this input relative to an
>> unmodified x86 emulator or UTM.
>>
>> *SO MIKE TERRY IS SIMPLY WRONG ABOUT THIS*
> 
> Idiot.
> 

Message-ID: <rLmcnQQ3-N_tvH_4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
On 3/1/2024 12:41 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
 > While an "active-simulator" [my own term] is at liberty
 > to combine straight simulation with add-on "enhancements"
 > that extend the functionality of the simulated machine,
 > in doing so it would no longer be a simulator in the sense
 > you need it to be.  So you mustn't do this!

When none of these add-on enhancements change behavior of the
simulated machine relative to a pure simulation of these same
inputs then the resulting machine remains a simulator even with
add-on enhancements.

Now that I have re-read what you said many times I noticed
nuances that I did not notice before.

*extend the functionality of the simulated machine*
does not refer to the simulator as I previously thought.

So it is my mistake. I apologize for mischaracterizing
what you said. This was unintentional.

>>
>>>> Because the simulator must perform every detail of the simulation of
>>>> the underlying machine it can watch every single state change of this
>>>> underlying machine and this does not change the behavior of the
>>>> simulated input AT ALL (relative to not watching the state changes).
>>>
>>> Yes, that is a correct interpretation.
>>>
>>
>> OK Great!
>> So a simulating termination analyzer could watch the behavior of its
>> input and analyze this watched behavior and transition to a non-final
>> state that indicates non-halting and then go back and continue
>> simulating the non-halting input and it remains a simulator all along.
>>
>> *This would not be a halt decider because all deciders must halt*
>> *It would be an unconventional termination analyzer*
>>
>> *It does correctly report that its pathological input never halts*
>>
>> *This method does work correctly on the H/D template*
>> *and the Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ template shown below*
>>
>> 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 }
>>
>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>>
>> *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
>>

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