Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Can ADD be this severe?
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 10:27:25 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <v6878t$36mk3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v5vkun$1b0k9$1@dont-email.me> <v60dci$1ib5p$1@dont-email.me> <v60red$1kr1q$2@dont-email.me> <v61hn7$1oec9$1@dont-email.me> <v61ipa$1og2o$2@dont-email.me> <v61jod$1oec9$2@dont-email.me> <v61leu$1p1uo$1@dont-email.me> <dd109397687b2f8e74c3e1e3d826772db8b65e40@i2pn2.org> <v62i31$21b7a$1@dont-email.me> <d593179ccad2eef1e84ab6eeddb0f255b2b386e5@i2pn2.org> <v63ml8$27f1a$2@dont-email.me> <1f93b46b7624427c02acebc57460bf5364a0bada@i2pn2.org> <v64r25$2e7d4$2@dont-email.me> <v65g7q$2lcik$1@dont-email.me> <v6659r$2oun1$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 09:27:26 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="70c8d6b77d1510d9355906f09ac241dc";
	logging-data="3365507"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18D+hqu4O074lZjMHBPU3Ob"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YusrdA4FjcTcEbptFCwptuIBFUo=
Bytes: 4419

On 2024-07-04 12:41:30 +0000, olcott said:

> On 7/4/2024 1:42 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-07-04 00:40:37 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 7/3/2024 6:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 7/3/24 10:19 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/3/2024 9:11 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Tue, 02 Jul 2024 22:55:12 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 10:50 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 02 Jul 2024 14:46:38 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 2:17 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 21:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 1:42 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 14:22 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 3:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 03:25 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> HHH repeats the process twice and aborts too soon.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> DDD is correctly emulated by any HHH that can exist which calls this
>>>>>>>>> emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted (which may be
>>>>>>>>> never).
>>>>>>>> Whatever HHH does, it does not run forever but aborts.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> HHH halts on input DDD.
>>>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly halt.
>>>>>> WTF? It only calls HHH, which you just said halts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> An aborted simulation does not count as halting.
>>>> 
>>>> And doesn't show non-halting either.
>>>> 
>>>>> Reaching it own machine address 00002183 counts as halting.
>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly do that.
>>>> 
>>>> But HHH doesn't DO a "Correct Simulation" that can show that, it only 
>>>> does a PARTIAL simulation.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> <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 words 10/13/2022>
>>> 
>>> until H correctly determines
>> 
>> Does that ever happen?
>> 
> 
> Knowledge of the C programming language proves that it happens
> in these three cases.
> 
> void Infinite_Loop()
> {
>    HERE: goto HERE;
> }
> 
> void Infinite_Recursion()
> {
>    Infinite_Recursion();
> }
> 
> void DDD()
> {
>    HHH(DDD);
> }
> 
> int main()
> {
>    HHH(Infinite_Loop);
>    HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
>    HHH(DDD);
> }
> 
> Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows that when 
> HHH emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop, Infinite_Recursion, 
> and DDD that it must abort these emulations so that itself can 
> terminate normally.

You haven't proven that in any of those cases. In particular, about DDD it
seems that your claim cannot be proven. The other cases might be provable.

-- 
Mikko