Path: ...!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: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:55:07 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v52mhr$jund$1@i2pn2.org>
References: <v4vrfg$2793f$1@dont-email.me> <v50o2t$2fh98$2@dont-email.me>
 <v51dc8$2jmrd$1@dont-email.me> <v52aum$jkbi$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v52bf4$2petm$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 01:55:07 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="654061"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v52bf4$2petm$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 4328
Lines: 82

On 6/20/24 6:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 5:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/20/24 10:12 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2024 3:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 20.jun.2024 om 02:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>> This shows all of the steps of HH0 simulating DDD
>>>>> calling a simulated HH0 simulating DDD
>>>>>
>>>>> https://liarparadox.org/HH0_(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>>>>> *Some of the key instructions are color coded*
>>>>> GREEN---DebugStep Address
>>>>> RED-----HH Address
>>>>> YELLOW--All of the DDD instructions
>>>>> CYAN----Return from DebugStep to Decide_Halting_HH
>>>>>
>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>> [000020a2] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>> [000020a3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>> [000020a5] 68a2200000 push 000020a2 ; push DDD
>>>>> [000020aa] e8f3f9ffff call 00001aa2 ; call H0
>>>>> [000020af] 83c404     add esp,+04   ; housekeeping
>>>>> [000020b2] 5d         pop ebp       ; housekeeping
>>>>> [000020b3] c3         ret           ; never gets here
>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000020b3]
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly which step of DDD emulated by H0 was emulated
>>>>> incorrectly such that this emulation would be complete?
>>>>> AKA DDD emulated by H0 reaches machine address [000020b3]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the simulation of a program with a loop of 5 iterations is 
>>>> aborted after 3 iterations, all instructions are correctly 
>>>> simulated. Nevertheless, it is an incorrect simulation, because it 
>>>> should simulate up to the final state of the program.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It would be helpful if you answer the actual question being asked
>>> right here and thus not answer some other question that was asked
>>> somewhere else.
>>
>> Why, you aren't?
>>
>> You seem to think you are God or something that gets to set the rules.
>>
>> YOU ARE NOT.
>>
>>>
>>>> Similarly, if a simulator which aborts after 2 cycles of recursive 
>>>> simulation of it self, it simulates only 1 of the 2 cycles of 
>>>> itself. So, it is incorrect, not because one instruction was 
>>>> simulated incorrectly, but because it did not simulate up to the 
>>>> final state of the simulated self.
>>>>
>>>
>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>> {
>>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> It also looks like you fail to comprehend that it is possible
>>> for a simulating termination analyzer to recognize inputs that
>>> would never terminate by recognizing the repeating state of
>>> these inputs after a finite number of steps of correct simulation.
>>
>> Right, but they don't do it by "Correctly Simulating" the input, but 
>> by a PARTIAL simulation that provides the needed information to prove 
>> that an ACTUAL CORRECT (and complete) simulation of that input would 
>> not halt.
>>
> 
> *This seems to be the first time that you told the truth about this*
> *This seems to be the first time that you told the truth about this*
> *This seems to be the first time that you told the truth about this*
> 
> 

And that works for Infinite_Loop, and Infinte_Recursion, but NOT for D 
or any of your variations of it.

You just don't understand how to build the required inductive argument, 
because it requires forming an actual proof.