Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H ###
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 17:11:12 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 114
Message-ID: <v3a4ug$1o4q1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$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>
 <v2n4f7$1ms87$1@dont-email.me> <v2nfma$1or9h$4@dont-email.me>
 <v2pkqq$28mg0$1@dont-email.me> <v2qhr2$2dpfr$6@dont-email.me>
 <v2s6kk$2q0pf$1@dont-email.me> <v2skde$2s65h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2uthd$3bjch$1@dont-email.me> <v2vdkp$3dtct$3@dont-email.me>
 <v2vned$3fl3r$1@dont-email.me> <v2vp8f$3g0m3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v31f7s$3ukf5$1@dont-email.me> <v3236b$29pd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3249e$28n59$1@i2pn2.org> <v325v5$2pkb$4@dont-email.me>
 <v32730$28n59$3@i2pn2.org> <v329md$3mh0$1@dont-email.me>
 <v347mh$hf5j$3@dont-email.me> <v34sbj$l6mn$2@dont-email.me>
 <v39ja5$1l09d$2@dont-email.me> <v39vjg$1mtd9$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 17:11:13 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9f8ee44a32d20ae863aaefdb80a74b69";
	logging-data="1839937"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+sYHVC0EKGGenzKEPnlyMO"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:k3MFkHQdIt1uPTX78TZ7p2aearg=
In-Reply-To: <v39vjg$1mtd9$7@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 6756

Op 30.mei.2024 om 15:40 schreef olcott:
> On 5/30/2024 5:10 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 28.mei.2024 om 17:13 schreef olcott:
>>> On 5/28/2024 4:21 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 27.mei.2024 om 17:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 5/27/2024 9:58 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/27/24 10:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 either pure simulator H or 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 many reviewers had a different notion of
>>>>>     correct simulation that diverges from this notion.
>>>>>
>>>>>     A simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates 1 to N 
>>>>> of the
>>>>>     x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the x86 
>>>>> instructions
>>>>>     of D. This may include M recursive emulations of H emulating 
>>>>> itself
>>>>>     emulating D.
>>>>>
>>>>> When we see that D correctly simulated by pure simulator H would 
>>>>> remain
>>>>> stuck in infinite recursive simulation then we also know that less 
>>>>> than
>>>>> an infinite number of steps is not enough steps for D correctly
>>>>> simulated by pure function H to reach its own simulated final state at
>>>>> line 06 and halt.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can equally well replace D with H.
>>>
>>> Only if we want to use the DISHONEST DODGE STRAW-MAN DECEPTION
>>> CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT FAKE REBUTTAL.
>>>
>>> My use of the point-by-pint basis of the Socratic method tosses
>>> such attempts out as Trolling.
>>
>> You do not even understand your own subject. I am just showing that 
>> your H does not halt, according to its own judgement. So, your 
>> simulating H is not in agreement with the requirement that it should 
>> halt. If the simulation of H would halt (as is the requirement), then 
>> D would reach line 04. The only reason D, the parameter duplicator, 
>> does not reach line 04 is that H does not halt.
>>
> 
> This is incorrect. Only the directly executed outermost H must halt.
> Everything else is merely data to this directly executed H.
> 
> 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 either pure simulator H or 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.
> 
> H correctly simulates 1 to ∞ steps of D with either pure function H or
> pure simulator H. In none of these cases does the correctly simulated D
> ever reach its own simulated final state and halt.
> 
> Whenever H is a pure function then H always halts.

Directly executed D halts, but olcott claims that the halt decider is 
correct when it says that it does not halt, if the simulator is unable 
to reach D's final state.
If that is true, it holds for any program, not only for D, but also for 
H. So we can repeat the argument for H:
H correctly simulates 1 to ∞ steps of H with either pure function H or 
pure simulator H. In none of these cases does the correctly simulated H 
ever reach its own simulated final state and halt.

So, either H halts, but then the proof (by simulating it in H) that it 
does not halt is invalid (and then the similar proof that D halts is 
invalid as well), or the direct execution is a proof that H halts (and 
then the direct execution of D is also a proof that D halts).

If not true, show how the 'correct simulation' of H reaches the final 
state of the simulated H.