Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v7aiqg$2b18m$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.mixmin.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: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is correctly rejected as non-halting V2 Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:13:04 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 79 Message-ID: <v7aiqg$2b18m$1@dont-email.me> References: <v6rg65$32o1o$3@dont-email.me> <v7085g$3j1h$1@dont-email.me> <v70ok7$61d8$10@dont-email.me> <v72lvl$k9t3$1@dont-email.me> <v73926$mjis$17@dont-email.me> <v75950$166e9$1@dont-email.me> <v76dgv$1cf96$2@dont-email.me> <v77pnu$1nn5l$2@dont-email.me> <v78fhd$1rc43$4@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 10:13:04 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b29b95fd0dce29f201fee23891e90c40"; logging-data="2458902"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+DUWYB1CbfjVXSxOY23swB" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:1X5Ii+W67TyxoQS55hRhG/ySSMc= Bytes: 4386 On 2024-07-17 13:04:44 +0000, olcott said: > On 7/17/2024 1:52 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-07-16 18:18:07 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 7/16/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-07-15 13:43:34 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 7/15/2024 3:17 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-07-14 14:50:47 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/14/2024 5:09 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2024-07-12 14:56:05 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We stipulate that the only measure of a correct emulation is the >>>>>>>>> semantics of the x86 programming language. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>> [00002163] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>> [00002164] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>> [00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>> [0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>> [00002170] 83c404 add esp,+04 >>>>>>>>> [00002173] 5d pop ebp >>>>>>>>> [00002174] c3 ret >>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When N steps of DDD are emulated by HHH according to the >>>>>>>>> semantics of the x86 language then N steps are emulated correctly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When we examine the infinite set of every HHH/DDD pair such that: >>>>>>>>> HHH₁ one step of DDD is correctly emulated by HHH. >>>>>>>>> HHH₂ two steps of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH. >>>>>>>>> HHH₃ three steps of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH. >>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>> HHH∞ The emulation of DDD by HHH never stops running. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The above specifies the infinite set of every HHH/DDD pair >>>>>>>>> where 1 to infinity steps of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You should use the indices here, too, e.g., "where 1 to infinity steps of >>>>>>>> DDD₁ are correctly emulated by HHH₃" or whatever you mean. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DDD is the exact same fixed constant finite string that >>>>>>> always calls HHH at the same fixed constant machine >>>>>>> address. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the function called by DDD is not part of the input then the input does >>>>>> not specify a behaviour and the question whether DDD halts is ill-posed. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We don't care about whether HHH halts. We know that >>>>> HHH halts or fails to meet its design spec. >>>>> >>>>> We are only seeing if DDD correctly emulated by HHH >>>>> can can possibly reach its own final state. >>>> >>>> HHH does not see even that. It only sees whther that it does not emulate >>>> DDD to its final state. >>> >>> No. HHH is not judging whether or not itself is a correct >>> emulator. The semantics of the x86 instructions that emulates >>> prove that its emulation is correct. >> >> The semantics does not prove. Only a proof would prove. >> > > Nothing besides the semantics of English proves that > a kitten is not any type of 15 story office building. The semantics of English does not prove that someone heard to use the word "kitten" does not refer to a 15 story office building. Perhaps the speaker is a criminal who does not want be understood except by members of the same gang. -- Mikko