| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<v3g0b9$2n53n$17@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise ---
pinned down
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:29:29 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v3g0b9$2n53n$17@i2pn2.org>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v3bduk$2im01$2@i2pn2.org>
<v3bedb$22f8h$1@dont-email.me> <v3bfbm$2im01$3@i2pn2.org>
<v3bg39$22o6m$1@dont-email.me> <v3cbhu$2k3ld$1@i2pn2.org>
<v3clo2$28p7n$1@dont-email.me> <v3dft1$2lfup$1@i2pn2.org>
<v3dhob$2dio8$1@dont-email.me> <v3dk0d$2lfup$2@i2pn2.org>
<v3dkf2$2e2po$1@dont-email.me> <v3dmnc$2lfup$3@i2pn2.org>
<v3do66$2ejq2$1@dont-email.me> <v3dqka$2lfup$4@i2pn2.org>
<v3dsev$2f6ul$1@dont-email.me> <v3dtt4$2lfup$5@i2pn2.org>
<v3dvr3$2jgjd$1@dont-email.me> <v3e0rj$2lfup$6@i2pn2.org>
<v3e1m6$2jmc2$1@dont-email.me> <v3f09p$2n53o$1@i2pn2.org>
<v3feqn$2rdp3$1@dont-email.me> <v3fgat$2n53n$5@i2pn2.org>
<v3fhan$2rsbs$1@dont-email.me> <v3fi55$2n53o$6@i2pn2.org>
<v3fiq7$2rsbs$5@dont-email.me> <v3flc5$2n53o$7@i2pn2.org>
<v3flm8$2sm3s$1@dont-email.me> <v3fm1e$2n53n$8@i2pn2.org>
<v3fmlc$2sogn$1@dont-email.me> <v3fncn$2n53n$9@i2pn2.org>
<v3fo1p$2t1ac$2@dont-email.me> <v3fqpt$2tjjm$1@dont-email.me>
<v3fu48$2ulbk$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:29:29 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
logging-data="2856055"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v3fu48$2ulbk$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 9343
Lines: 175
On 6/1/24 3:51 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/1/2024 1:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 01.jun.2024 om 20:07 schreef olcott:
>>> On 6/1/2024 12:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/1/24 1:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/1/2024 12:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/1/24 1:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 11:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 10:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 11:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *I will not discuss any other points with you until after
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you either*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) Acknowledge that DD correctly simulated by HH and ⟨Ĥ⟩
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by embedded_H remain stuck in recursive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 to ∞ of correct simulation or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Correctly prove otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And until you answer the question of what that actually
>>>>>>>>>>>> means, I will reply WHO CARES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)(); // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>>>>>>>>> 00 int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int DD(ptr p)
>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>> 03 int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>>>>>>>>>>> 04 if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>> 05 HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>> 06 return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>> 11 HH(DD,DD);
>>>>>>>>>>> 12 return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Every DD correctly simulated by any HH of the infinite set of
>>>>>>>>>>> HH/DD
>>>>>>>>>>> pairs that match the above template never reaches past its
>>>>>>>>>>> own simulated
>>>>>>>>>>> line 03 in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation of DD by HH.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In this case HH is either a pure simulator that never halts or
>>>>>>>>>>> HH is a pure function that stops simulating after some finite
>>>>>>>>>>> number
>>>>>>>>>>> of simulated lines. The line count is stored in a local
>>>>>>>>>>> variable.
>>>>>>>>>>> The pure function HH always returns the meaningless value of 56
>>>>>>>>>>> after it stops simulating.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, still no answer, to teh question.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You can pretend that you don't understand something that you do
>>>>>>>>> indeed
>>>>>>>>> understand into perpetuity.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The key measure of dishonestly would be that you continue to say
>>>>>>>>> that you don't understand yet never ever point out exactly what
>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>> don't understand and why you don't understand it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I giuess that Mean YOU don't even know what you are asking,
>>>>>>>>>> though it seems that now you are admitting that your HH
>>>>>>>>>> doesn't actually ANSWER the question, so it isn't ACTUALL a
>>>>>>>>>> decider for any function except the "56" mapping.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I will repeat the question and until you answer the question
>>>>>>>>>> of what that actually means, I will reply WHO CARES.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> DO you mean the simulation of the TEMPLATE DD,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Of course I don't mean that nonsense. I mean exactly what I
>>>>>>>>> specified*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which means that we CAN'T simulate the call HH as we have no
>>>>>>>>>> code past point to simulate, and thus your claim is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or, do you mean a given instance of HH simulating a given
>>>>>>>>>> instance of DD, at which point we never have the 1 to infinte
>>>>>>>>>> number of simulatons of THAT INPUT, so your claim is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Its not that hard when one refrains from dishonesty*
>>>>>>>>> We can't even say that you forgot these details from one reply
>>>>>>>>> to the next because the details are still in this same post.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And every one gives a meaningless answer,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *THEN TRY TO REFUTE THIS UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT*
>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HH with an x86 emulator cannot possibly
>>>>>>> reach past its own machine instruction [00001c2e] in any finite
>>>>>>> number of steps of correct emulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why? I don't care about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have said, the implication of your definition of "Correct
>>>>>> SImulation" means that this says NOTHING about the halting
>>>>>> behavior of DD. (only not halted yet)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *THEN TRY TO REFUTE THIS UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT*
>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HH with an x86 emulator cannot possibly
>>>>> reach past its own machine instruction [00001c2e] in any finite
>>>>> *or infinite* number of steps of correct emulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I say it that way you claim to be confused and what I do
>>>>> not say it that way you claim what I say is incomplete proof.
>>>>
>>>> WHy do I care? I won't spend the effort to even try to refute
>>>> something that is clearly meaningless.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to have a conflict of definitions, as a given DD will only
>>>> ever be simulated by ONE given HH that only simuates for one number
>>>> of steps.
>>>>
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)(); // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>> 00 int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>>> 01 int DD(ptr p)
>>> 02 {
>>> 03 int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>>> 04 if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05 HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06 return Halt_Status;
>>> 07 }
>>> 08
>>> 09 int main()
>>> 10 {
>>> 11 HH(DD,DD);
>>> 12 return 0;
>>> 13 }
>>>
>>> You continue to either fail to understand or seemingly more likely
>>> simply lie about the fact that every DD correctly simulated by any
>>> HH that can possibly exist cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>
>> Only if the simulation of HH simulated by HH does not reach HH's
>> return, otherwise the simulation of DD would go to line 04.
>>
>>>
>>> *THIS MEANS THAT THE INPUT TO HH(DD,DD) DOES NOT HALT*
>>> *THIS MEANS THAT THE INPUT TO HH(DD,DD) DOES NOT HALT*
>>> *THIS MEANS THAT THE INPUT TO HH(DD,DD) DOES NOT HALT*
>>>
>>
>> If true: The input to HH is both DD and HH called by DD, so both DD
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========