Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v2emdh$3r3vn$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: Can D simulated by H terminate normally? --- Message_ID Provided Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 00:17:37 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 200 Message-ID: <v2emdh$3r3vn$1@dont-email.me> References: <v0k4jc$laej$1@dont-email.me> <v0m29q$166o1$1@dont-email.me> <v0m37e$2gl1e$1@i2pn2.org> <v0m3v5$16k3h$1@dont-email.me> <v0m55t$2gl1f$3@i2pn2.org> <v0m5sn$172p4$1@dont-email.me> <v0m7em$2gl1f$5@i2pn2.org> <v0m7tq$17dpv$1@dont-email.me> <v0m8g9$2gl1e$6@i2pn2.org> <v0m978$17k7o$3@dont-email.me> <v0mko6$2hf3s$2@i2pn2.org> <v0n59h$1h98e$1@dont-email.me> <v0o037$2j1tu$3@i2pn2.org> <v0oc65$1q3aq$3@dont-email.me> <v0p9ts$2ki5r$6@i2pn2.org> <v0q1rk$2a3u1$1@dont-email.me> <v0qkti$2m1nf$1@i2pn2.org> <v0r4a3$2hb7o$6@dont-email.me> <v0rsbr$2m1nf$6@i2pn2.org> <v0segm$2v4oq$1@dont-email.me> <v0t8o9$2p3ri$2@i2pn2.org> <v0tpjf$3881i$5@dont-email.me> <v0ulma$2qov4$1@i2pn2.org> <v2b179$2u8oi$2@dont-email.me> <v2b1g3$1ct7p$17@i2pn2.org> <v2bb0g$308qd$1@dont-email.me> <v2bc8u$1ecj9$4@i2pn2.org> <v2bdaj$30o5r$1@dont-email.me> <v2be6g$1ecja$2@i2pn2.org> <v2btfr$36vvc$3@dont-email.me> <v2cqii$3cek2$2@dont-email.me> <v2cthk$3d018$1@dont-email.me> <v2ek1t$3qnl3$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 07:17:38 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="629f9cefad5d4023792ce8f8ed8d9594"; logging-data="4034551"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Cbu0N/Mgdu5U+MpqQwCii" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:WoW+i9vgx+pTFlWacN48N2Z3wlY= In-Reply-To: <v2ek1t$3qnl3$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 9080 On 5/19/2024 11:37 PM, immibis wrote: > On 19/05/24 15:06, olcott wrote: >> On 5/19/2024 7:16 AM, immibis wrote: >>> On 19/05/24 05:59, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/18/2024 6:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 5/18/24 7:24 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 5/18/2024 6:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/18/24 6:44 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 3:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 3:57 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 5/1/2024 7:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> The second method uses the fact that you have not restricted >>>>>>>>>>> what H is allowed to do, and thus H can remember that it is >>>>>>>>>>> simulating, and if a call to H shows that it is currently >>>>>>>>>>> doing a simulation, just immediately return 0. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nice try but this has no effect on any D correctly simulated >>>>>>>>>> by H. >>>>>>>>>> When the directly executed H aborts its simulation it only >>>>>>>>>> returns >>>>>>>>>> to whatever directly executed it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why? My H does correctly simulate the D it was given. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You don't seem to understand how the C code actually works. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If the directly executed outermost H does not abort then none of >>>>>>>>>> the inner simulated ones abort because they are the exact same >>>>>>>>>> code. >>>>>>>>>> When the directly executed outermost H does abort it can only >>>>>>>>>> return >>>>>>>>>> to its own caller. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> WHAT inner simulatioin? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My H begins as: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> int H(ptr x, ptr y) { >>>>>>>>> static int flag = 0; >>>>>>>>> if(flag) return 0; >>>>>>>>> flag = 1; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> followed by essentially your code for H, except that you need >>>>>>>>> to disable the hack that doesn't simulate the call to H, but >>>>>>>>> just let it continue into H where it will immediately return to >>>>>>>>> D and D will then return. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thus, your claim is shown to be wrong. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We are talking about every element of an infinite set where >>>>>>>> H correctly simulates 1 to ∞ steps of D thus including 0 to ∞ >>>>>>>> recursive simulations of H simulating itself simulating D. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *At whatever point the directly executed H(D,D) stops simulating* >>>>>>>> *its input it cannot possibly return to any simulated input* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And my H never stops simulating, so that doesn't apply. It will >>>>>>> reach the final state. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Show the error in my execution trace that I empirically* >>>>>> *proved has no error by H correctly simulating D to the* >>>>>> *point where H correctly simulates itself simulating D* >>>>>> (Fully operational empirically code proved this) >>>>> >>>>> See below: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)(); // ptr is pointer to int function >>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y); >>>>>> 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 return 0; >>>>>> 13 } >>>>> >>>>> For Reference >>>>> >>>>> 14 int H(ptr x, ptr y) >>>>> 15 { >>>>> 16 static int flag = 0 >>>>> 17 if (flag) >>>>> 18 return 0 >>>>> 19 ... continuation of H that simulates its input >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly >>>>>> emulates at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order >>>>>> specified by the x86 instructions of D. >>>>>> >>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H >>>>>> in the order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling >>>>>> H(D,D) in recursive simulation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Execution Trace >>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D); >>>>>> >>>>>> keeps repeating (unless aborted) >>>>>> Line 01 >>>>>> Line 02 >>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D) >>>>> >>>>> Line 03: Calls H (line 14) >>>>> Line 16: Static already inited, so not changed. >>>>> Line 17: Flag is 1, so >>>>> Line 18: Return 0 >>>>> Line 03: Set Halt_Status to 0 >>>>> Line 04: if (Halt_Status) halts status is 0, so skip >>>>> Line 06: return Halt_Status >>>>> >>>>> Simulation completed, program halted. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Simulation invariant: >>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line >>>>>> 03. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nope. Not for this H >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> (a) That idea might work yet you did not say it correctly. >>>> For example line 11 is the first one invoked. >>>> (b) Computable functions cannot alter their behavior this way. >>>> >>>> (1) the function return values are identical for identical arguments >>>> (no >>>> variation with local static variables, non-local variables, mutable >>>> reference arguments or input streams, i.e., referential >>>> transparency), and >>> >>> Your function H works like Richard's function H. You just called the >>> variable "execution trace" instead of "flag". >> >> pages 4-5 (of a paper that I published 2021-09-26 09:39 AM) >> Show H simulating P and H simulating itself simulating P. >> >> The 395 pages of the execution trace of the simulated H are >> screened out. No one here could ever understand the half page >> trace so embedding that in 395 more pages would not help. > > The fact that you took 395 pages to get to "if(flag) return 0;" does not > mean that you didn't use "if(flag) return 0;" > >> >> That P is simulated correctly is proven by the fact that the >> x86 assembly language instructions of P are correctly simulated >> and they are simulated in the order that the assembly language ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========