Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v3v3mu$236ut$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
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: DD correctly simulated by HH --- never stops running without aborting its simulation Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:58:52 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 153 Message-ID: <v3v3mu$236ut$1@dont-email.me> References: <v3svh3$1k5vr$1@dont-email.me> <v3uen8$1vn0h$1@dont-email.me> <v3v1gf$22vrk$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 15:58:55 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5bcde24dcfe9ee81a0f51067fa74cb7b"; logging-data="2202589"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ZAPz4E8NPCuUTsC+sM6Vr" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:XV/lB8cCnK93yXNdub81RY5A+pY= Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: <v3v1gf$22vrk$2@dont-email.me> Bytes: 7762 Op 07.jun.2024 om 15:21 schreef olcott: > On 6/7/2024 3:00 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 06.jun.2024 om 20:35 schreef olcott: >>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022> >>> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D >>> until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never >>> stop running unless aborted then >>> >>> H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D >>> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations. >>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words10/13/2022> >>> >>> *Try to show how this DD correctly simulated by any HH ever* >>> *stops running without having its simulation aborted by HH* >>> >>> _DD() >>> [00001e12] 55 push ebp >>> [00001e13] 8bec mov ebp,esp >>> [00001e15] 51 push ecx >>> [00001e16] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08] >>> [00001e19] 50 push eax ; push DD >>> [00001e1a] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08] >>> [00001e1d] 51 push ecx ; push DD >>> [00001e1e] e85ff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH >>> >> >> Olcott has proven himself that HH reports false negatives, with the >> following example: >> >> typedef int (*ptr)(); // ptr is pointer to int function in C >> >> int H(ptr p, ptr i); >> >> int main() >> { >> return H(main, 0); >> } >> >> He proved that main halts and that H reports non-halting. >> > > main() does meet the Sipser approved criteria and you cannot > possibly show otherwise. > > If simulating halt decider HH correctly simulates its input main > until HH correctly determines that its simulated main would never > stop running unless aborted then > > _main() > [00001e42] 55 push ebp > [00001e43] 8bec mov ebp,esp > [00001e45] 6a00 push +00 > [00001e47] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 > [00001e4c] e831f5ffff call 00001382 > [00001e51] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e54] 50 push eax > [00001e55] 6843070000 push 00000743 > [00001e5a] e843e9ffff call 000007a2 > [00001e5f] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e62] eb79 jmp 00001edd > [00001e64] 6a05 push +05 > [00001e66] 68321d0000 push 00001d32 > [00001e6b] e8f2f6ffff call 00001562 > [00001e70] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e73] 50 push eax > [00001e74] 6853070000 push 00000753 > [00001e79] e824e9ffff call 000007a2 > [00001e7e] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e81] 68621d0000 push 00001d62 > [00001e86] e8d7f9ffff call 00001862 > [00001e8b] 83c404 add esp,+04 > [00001e8e] 50 push eax > [00001e8f] 6863070000 push 00000763 > [00001e94] e809e9ffff call 000007a2 > [00001e99] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e9c] 6a05 push +05 > [00001e9e] 68f21c0000 push 00001cf2 > [00001ea3] e8baf6ffff call 00001562 > [00001ea8] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001eab] 50 push eax > [00001eac] 6873070000 push 00000773 > [00001eb1] e8ece8ffff call 000007a2 > [00001eb6] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001eb9] 68e21d0000 push 00001de2 > [00001ebe] 68e21d0000 push 00001de2 > [00001ec3] e89af6ffff call 00001562 > [00001ec8] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001ecb] 50 push eax > [00001ecc] 6883070000 push 00000783 > [00001ed1] e8cce8ffff call 000007a2 > [00001ed6] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001ed9] 33c0 xor eax,eax > [00001edb] eb02 jmp 00001edf > [00001edd] 33c0 xor eax,eax > [00001edf] 5d pop ebp > [00001ee0] c3 ret > Size in bytes:(0159) [00001ee0] > > machine stack stack machine assembly > address address data code language > ======== ======== ======== ========= ============= > [00001e42][00103375][00000000] 55 push ebp > [00001e43][00103375][00000000] 8bec mov ebp,esp > [00001e45][00103371][00000000] 6a00 push +00 > [00001e47][0010336d][00001e42] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 ; push main > [00001e4c][00103369][00001e51] e831f5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH > New slave_stack at:103419 > > Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:113421 > [00001e42][0011340d][00113411] 55 push ebp > [00001e43][0011340d][00113411] 8bec mov ebp,esp > [00001e45][00113409][00000000] 6a00 push +00 > [00001e47][00113405][00001e42] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 ; push main > [00001e4c][00113401][00001e51] e831f5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH > New slave_stack at:14de41 > [00001e42][0015de35][0015de39] 55 push ebp > [00001e43][0015de35][0015de39] 8bec mov ebp,esp > [00001e45][0015de31][00000000] 6a00 push +00 > [00001e47][0015de2d][00001e42] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 ; push main > [00001e4c][0015de29][00001e51] e831f5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH > Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped > > [00001e51][00103375][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e54][00103371][00000000] 50 push eax > [00001e55][0010336d][00000743] 6843070000 push 00000743 > [00001e5a][0010336d][00000743] e843e9ffff call 000007a2 > Input_Halts = 0 > [00001e5f][00103375][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08 > [00001e62][00103375][00000000] eb79 jmp 00001edd > [00001edd][00103375][00000000] 33c0 xor eax,eax > [00001edf][00103379][00000018] 5d pop ebp > [00001ee0][0010337d][00000000] c3 ret > Number of Instructions Executed(11357) == 170 Pages > > You showed the proof for the false negative already somewhat earlier. No need to repeat it. Also the fact that Sipser agreed that there is a good explanation for the false negative, was mentioned by you before. We also know that you do not claim that the decider H reports on real behaviour (direct execution), but about its own simulation. That is a subtle difference, just as in these two sentences: a) main is non-halting. b) H's decision is that main is non-halting. It is clear that b can be true, even if a is false, because it remains H's decision. Your claims come down to that H's decision is about b, not a. Then, of course, H decision is trivially correct. So, false negatives should not bother you. (But then H's decision is completely uninteresting for most people.)