Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 12:19:10 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 360
Message-ID: <v1q1ie$2l40t$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$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$2@dont-email.me> <v1labh$kf53$1@i2pn2.org> <v1lfnq$1e7af$1@dont-email.me> <v1lh1g$kf52$4@i2pn2.org> <v1lmo1$1g1mj$1@dont-email.me> <v1luu1$lbo5$3@i2pn2.org> <v1lvuo$1i47i$1@dont-email.me> <v1m1bf$lbo5$4@i2pn2.org> <v1m2hc$1ijhr$1@dont-email.me> <v1m31m$lbo4$1@i2pn2.org> <v1m4et$1iv85$1@dont-email.me> <v1m5co$lbo4$2@i2pn2.org> <v1m71h$1jnpi$1@dont-email.me> <v1m7mh$lbo5$5@i2pn2.org> <v1mb8f$1kgpl$1@dont-email.me> <v1mkf8$lbo5$7@i2pn2.org> <v1mkmm$1q5ee$1@dont-email.me> <v1na6f$1ugl0$1@dont-email.me> <v1o67n$24f4c$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 11:19:11 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="49ecfdb23db14cf90d3eda01e5538458";
	logging-data="2789405"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/irX+3YdgZLNT8T6iNQVpJ"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hZEIbuk0Wl5VbKqiS49+UHVL8C4=
Bytes: 19960

On 2024-05-11 16:26:30 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/11/2024 3:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-05-11 02:21:10 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 5/10/2024 9:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/10/24 7:39 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/10/2024 5:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/10/24 6:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 4:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/10/24 5:43 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 4:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/24 5:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 3:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/24 4:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 3:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/24 1:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 11:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/24 11:50 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 9:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *stop running unless aborted by H*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as *D NEVER simulated by H*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have shown a reckless disregard for the truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that would win a defamation case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========