Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in
 recursive simulation?
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 18:17:55 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v2r3mk$1vblq$6@i2pn2.org>
References: <v2nsvh$1rd65$2@dont-email.me> <v2pl4r$28ohs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2qi1g$2dpfr$7@dont-email.me> <v2qisk$1vblq$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v2qs1a$2fesr$5@dont-email.me> <v2qvaj$1vblp$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v2r1hs$2ge4f$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 22:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2076346"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <v2r1hs$2ge4f$5@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4221
Lines: 81

On 5/24/24 5:41 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/24/2024 4:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/24/24 4:07 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/24/2024 12:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/24/24 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/24/2024 4:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-05-23 17:04:49 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>>>>> 00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>>> 01       int D(ptr p)
>>>>>>> 02       {
>>>>>>> 03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
>>>>>>> 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       }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The above template refers to an infinite set of H/D pairs where D is
>>>>>>> correctly simulated by pure function H. This was done because many
>>>>>>> reviewers used the shell game ploy to endlessly switch which H/D 
>>>>>>> pair
>>>>>>> was being referred to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Correct Simulation Defined*
>>>>>>>     This is provided because every reviewer had a different 
>>>>>>> notion of
>>>>>>>     correct simulation that diverges from this notion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     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); H(D,D) simulates lines 01, 
>>>>>>> 02, and 03
>>>>>>>     of D. This invokes H(D,D) again to repeat the process in endless
>>>>>>>     recursive simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One can see that D is never stuch in recursive simulation unless H 
>>>>>> is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Counter-factual, please try again.
>>>>
>>>> No, it is a PROVEN fact, as oposed your your unsound logic that 
>>>> tries to disprove it.
>>>>
>>>> How can D(D) be stuck in "Recursive Simulation" unless the H(D,D) it 
>>>> calls is.
>>>
>>>
>>> When D is correctly simulated by pure function H where H eventually
>>> halts and returns the meaningless 56 no D correctly simulated by
>>> H ever reaches its final state at line 06 an halts
>>> *BECAUSE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE WAS STUCK IN RECURSIVE SIMULATION*
>>>
>>
>> So, you just admit that you "decider" returns a "meaningless" value,.
>>
> 
> I can't make a computable function that never stops running
> and I can make a pure function that never returns any value.
> H is a decider in that it always decides 56.
> 
> 

So, are you saying that if you can't give the right answer, a LIE is ok?

Shows you reckless reguard for the truth,