Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 18:03:00 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <v44g74$3j5rn$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v3neft$game$1@dont-email.me> <v3nfc4$gatu$1@dont-email.me> <v3ngcu$gc4a$2@dont-email.me> <v3p5te$sr75$1@dont-email.me> <v3pqdr$1003g$1@dont-email.me> <v3rriu$1e603$1@dont-email.me> <v3sci6$1gra7$4@dont-email.me> <v3sied$1i3na$1@dont-email.me> <v3sj9e$1hufb$2@dont-email.me> <v3u70p$1usbl$1@dont-email.me> <v3v34l$22vrk$4@dont-email.me> <v40r2r$2g592$1@dont-email.me> <v41ijv$2jqdk$3@dont-email.me> <v43lo5$3a67q$1@dont-email.me> <v448ee$3fscf$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2024 17:03:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="97bfb415bfdd6982d91aa5220190d206";
	logging-data="3774327"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX199ANwsDqeeLLzJT7+fBaKl"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dQ2OrWolOH3o+Z8eQklQ3uzGjoE=
Bytes: 4924

On 2024-06-09 12:50:22 +0000, olcott said:

> On 6/9/2024 2:31 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-08 12:25:35 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 6/8/2024 12:43 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-06-07 13:49:09 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/7/2024 12:49 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-06-06 15:06:22 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>> <Professor Sipser agreed>
>>>>>>>    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.
>>>>>>> </Professor Sipser agreed>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
>>>>>>> // Strachey(1965) CPL translated to C
>>>>>>> void P(u32 x)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>    if (H(x, x))
>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> People here that are experts in the C programming language know that
>>>>>>> *P correctly simulated by H cannot possibly stop running unless aborted*
>>>>>>> yet lie about this or to try to get away with the strawman deception
>>>>>>> CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT fake rebuttal.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> People here who have recently followed these discussions know that "P
>>>>>> correctly simulated by H cannot possibly stop running unless aborted"
>>>>>> does not confirm or contradict anything Linz and Strachey have said.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When P correctly simulated by H meets this criteria
>>>>>    If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input P
>>>>>    until H correctly determines that its simulated P would never
>>>>>    stop running unless aborted then
>>>> 
>>>> Still unproven whther P ever meets those criteria, in particular
>>>> the last "correctly".
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That you lack the mandatory prerequisite knowledge to understand
>>> that this is correct provided zero evidence that this is incorrect.
>> 
>> Doesn't matter. Much less understanding is needed to see that you have
>> not proven that P ever meets the criteria agreed by Siplser. Equally
>> clear is that you have not proven that P never meets those criteria.
>> 
>>> I incorporate by reference
>>> (a) The x86 language
>>> (b) The notion of an x86 emulator
>>> 
>>> (c) I provide this complete function
>>> 
>>> void DDD(int (*x)())
>>> {
>>>    HH(x, x);
>>> }
>>> 
>>> _DDD()
>>> [00001de2] 55         push ebp
>>> [00001de3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> [00001de5] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001de8] 50         push eax         ; push DD
>>> [00001de9] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> [00001dec] 51         push ecx         ; push DD
>>> [00001ded] e890f5ffff call 00001382    ; call HH
>>> [00001df2] 83c408     add esp,+08
>>> [00001df5] 5d         pop ebp
>>> [00001df6] c3         ret
>>> Size in bytes:(0021) [00001df6]
>>> 
>>> Then I state that No DDD correctly emulated by any
>>> x86 emulator H can possibly reach its own [00001df6]
>>> instruction.
>>> 
>>> To anyone having this mandatory prerequisite knowledge
>>> (perhaps not you) every x86 emulation of DDD by any
>>> x86 emulator H continually repeats the first seven lines
>>> of DDD until it crashes due to out-of-memory error.
>> 
>> OK, but insufficient.
>> 
> 
> Try and show what is missing.

Truth preseving transformations.

-- 
Mikko