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: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H ###
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 13:06:31 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <v2n4f7$1ms87$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$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$1@dont-email.me> <v1ln3c$vfh$1@news.muc.de> <v1s6e6$397iq$2@dont-email.me> <v1slmi$3cjtp$1@dont-email.me> <v1t8tt$3gu9t$3@dont-email.me> <v1vc8j$3jmr$1@dont-email.me> <v1vsru$7eqc$1@dont-email.me> <v21r4i$otc2$2@dont-email.me> <v22k4b$umr4$1@dont-email.me> <v24oah$1h4u3$1@dont-email.me> <v256fc$1kais$1@dont-email.me> <v27d05$25ga0$1@dont-email.me> <v2838r$29rd7$1@dont-email.me> <v2a8th$2ps09$1@dont-email.me> <v2ahqc$2qvr9$1@dont-email.me> <v2cb5s$39fvg$1@dont-email.me> <v2crk0$3cifp$1@dont-email.me> <v2cvuo$3dfkm$1@dont-email.me> <v2i921$jvcs$5@dont-email.me> <v2k7fe$12vjm$1@dont-email.me> <v2l0q8$17mu1$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 12:06:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cf913c4199a735193557ed034232fdcc";
	logging-data="1798407"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18n78S9+kj9O4gHmx4oThtt"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HcUOrpSBufQ0R68LYD1DnxGPDXM=
Bytes: 4497

On 2024-05-22 14:51:50 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/22/2024 2:39 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-05-21 13:54:09 +0000, olcott said:
>>> You are asking for the definition of correct simulation
>>> that I have been providing for quite a while recently.
>> 
>> That was not my main intent. I wanted to know why your
>> statement
>> 
>>>>>>>>> No D simulated correctly by any H of every H/D pair specified
>>>>>>>>> by the above template ever reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>> 
>> exludes every unsimulated or incorrectly simulated D?
> 
> That sounds like Richard that assumed that incorrect answers are OK
> unless I specifically say that incorrect answers are not OK.

Maybe but I don't promise that the response to the incorrect answer
will sound the same.

> On 5/19/2024 12:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>  > On 5/19/24 9:59 AM, olcott wrote:
>  >> Richard has stated that he thinks that an example of
>  >> {D never simulated by H} ∈ {every D simulated by H}
>  >
>  > No, the H that didn't simulate its input shows that
>  > *once you allow H to not be required to be correct*,
>  > that we can then have a trivial function that is
>  > "just as correct" (since wrong answers were allowed).
> 
>>> A c function is correctly simulated when its machine language
>>> instructions are emulated with an x86 emulator in the order
>>> that they are specified by the x86 machine language of this
>>> c function.
>> 
>> Does "its machine language instructions" mean all executed instructions
>> until the progam terminates? Or from the start of the program until
>> there is no reason to continue? Or from some point to some other point?
>> 
> 
> It means that 1 to N instructions of D are correctly simulated
> by pure function H. Because D correctly simulated by H remains
> stuck in recursive simulation D cannot possibly reach is own
> line 06 and halt.

If you mean that H cannot simulate D to the line 06 then say so.
A D that is simulated by H is D and so is a D that is not simulated
by H so both can do what a D can do. Saying "simulated by H" adds
nothing.

>>> For non-terminating functions we can only correctly
>>> simulate N machine language instructions.
>> 
>> But does you definition regard that partial simulation as "correct
>> simulation"?
> 
> When 1 to 2^64 instructions of D are correctly simulated by H
> it becomes clear that for every H/D pair of the infinite set
> of H/D pairs D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive
> simulation.

If you think that the meaning of "correctly simulate" is not
important you should not use those words.

-- 
Mikko