Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Simulating termination analyzers for dummies
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 00:22:27 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 125
Message-ID: <v50eaj$2e5ij$3@dont-email.me>
References: <v4oaqu$f9p5$1@dont-email.me> <v4os9e$i70m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4p9mb$lavj$1@dont-email.me> <v4pdph$l7lf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4pepj$ln46$15@dont-email.me> <v4pgk3$l7le$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4phhl$mub6$2@dont-email.me> <v4piea$l7le$5@dont-email.me>
 <v4pmb8$nmvq$1@dont-email.me> <v4rekj$180pg$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4rv45$1blnm$1@dont-email.me> <v4s8k7$1dcrb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4s9cj$1dk9i$1@dont-email.me> <v4sa6j$1dcrb$3@dont-email.me>
 <v4scfo$1eb2f$1@dont-email.me> <v4u3mr$1rrod$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4ukq9$1vpm0$2@dont-email.me> <v50e1q$2e95t$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 07:22:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f3edc3033c9d2f90d2fdc1ea5e7f24e7";
	logging-data="2561619"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18GA+XMXAMM+HBRhuQ2zhYm"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7t5YKkZ1+MdXT3r/b1DWcmPp0rM=
In-Reply-To: <v50e1q$2e95t$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6995

On 6/20/2024 12:17 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-06-19 13:00:57 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 6/19/2024 3:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 18.jun.2024 om 18:26 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/18/2024 10:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 18.jun.2024 om 17:33 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 10:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a verified fact that serious C people have recently
>>>>>> agreed to the following verbatim statement in the C group.
>>>>
>>>> http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cv4pg5p%24morv%241%40raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org%3E+
>>>>
>>>>>> You either lack this degree of skill in C or are only
>>>>>> interested in playing head games.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have seen the response. It was most certainly not a serious reply.
>>>>> But you know apparently to little of C to understand that.
>>>>> Probably, because you are unable to escape from rebuttal mode, even 
>>>>> if the truth is obvious.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have known C since K&R was the standard and met
>>>> Bjarne Stroustrup when he came to our university
>>>> to promote his new C++ programming language.
>>>>
>>>> *You seem to be willfully ignorant*
>>>>
>>>>> It was your own proof that showed that in
>>>>>
>>>>>         int main()
>>>>>         {
>>>>>           return H(main);
>>>>>         }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> main halts, whereas H reported non-halting. So, it you were honest 
>>>>> you would stop claiming that H is correct.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is merely a more difficult to understand version of this
>>>> same pathological relationship.
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", HH0(main));
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> _main()
>>>> [000020c2] 55         push ebp
>>>> [000020c3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [000020c5] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
>>>> [000020ca] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
>>>> [000020cf] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>> [000020d2] 50         push eax
>>>> [000020d3] 6843070000 push 00000743
>>>> [000020d8] e885e6ffff call 00000762
>>>> [000020dd] 83c408     add esp,+08
>>>> [000020e0] eb04       jmp 000020e6
>>>> [000020e2] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>>>> [000020e4] eb02       jmp 000020e8
>>>> [000020e6] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>>>> [000020e8] 5d         pop ebp
>>>> [000020e9] c3         ret
>>>> Size in bytes:(0040) [000020e9]
>>>>
>>>>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>>>>   address   address   data      code       language
>>>>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
>>>> [000020c2][001036c3][00000000] 55         push ebp
>>>> [000020c3][001036c3][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [000020c5][001036bf][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
>>>> [000020ca][001036bb][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
>>>> New slave_stack at:103767
>>>>
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:11376f
>>>> [000020c2][0011375f][00113763] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
>>>> [000020c3][0011375f][00113763] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [000020c5][0011375b][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
>>>> [000020ca][00113757][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
>>>> New slave_stack at:14e18f
>>>> [000020c2][0015e187][0015e18b] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
>>>> [000020c3][0015e187][0015e18b] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [000020c5][0015e183][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
>>>> [000020ca][0015e17f][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>>
>>>> [000020cf][001036c3][00000000] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>> [000020d2][001036bf][00000000] 50         push eax
>>>> [000020d3][001036bb][00000743] 6843070000 push 00000743
>>>> [000020d8][001036bb][00000743] e885e6ffff call 00000762
>>>> Input_Halts = 0
>>>> [000020dd][001036c3][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
>>>> [000020e0][001036c3][00000000] eb04       jmp 000020e6
>>>> [000020e6][001036c3][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>>>> [000020e8][001036c7][00000018] 5d         pop ebp
>>>> [000020e9][001036cb][00000000] c3         ret           ; exit main
>>>> Number of Instructions Executed(10070) == 150 Pages
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is easier to understand because a print statement was added.
>>> You proved that it halts, but H0 reports non-halting.
>>> So, it produces a false negative.
>>> So, now it has been proved that H, H0, etc produce false negatives, 
>>> when used to determine halting behaviour, please, stop to call them 
>>> halt-deciders, or termination-deciders.
>>> They might be "simulation deciders". When returning true, the 
>>> simulation was correct, when false, the full simulation was not 
>>> possible.
>>
>> I don't want to discuss your screwy example because I
>> can't use screwy examples in my paper.
> 
> If you could ever publish a paper there would soon be papers with examples
> (which you may call "screwy") that your method gets wrong.
> 

My whole purpose is to refute the conventional proofs.


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer