Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as
 non-halting --- last chance
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 20:34:00 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 190
Message-ID: <v7rhep$1ri07$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v6rg65$32o1o$3@dont-email.me> <v70lmo$61d8$1@dont-email.me>
 <8a6e6d9ff49aabe2525ce5729a439c807de4768a@i2pn2.org>
 <34Ocnd4voeWlDAn7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v725d7$hlvg$1@dont-email.me>
 <aa7643b6d8c46d2c4dd5ef92ae3650afe114adbb@i2pn2.org>
 <v734ct$mjis$2@dont-email.me>
 <056325e336f81a50f4fb9e60f90934eaac823d22@i2pn2.org>
 <v73gk2$obtd$1@dont-email.me>
 <e2958e7ea04d53590c79b53bfb4bc9dff468772b@i2pn2.org>
 <v742r2$s48s$2@dont-email.me>
 <210383b2ee318f68a96d94aec314ee8b93f79b7f@i2pn2.org>
 <v75u22$19j7l$4@dont-email.me>
 <fde630817c49562bc765bdbc98e16a1582bcad53@i2pn2.org>
 <v78mda$1smtm$2@dont-email.me> <v7d5cl$2t3ja$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7ds0o$30pvh$3@dont-email.me> <v7fs29$3f4g7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7gd17$3hlc2$2@dont-email.me> <v7ikn4$1jv5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7j2pg$3o7r$3@dont-email.me> <v7l3di$idv1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7lnrf$luh0$1@dont-email.me> <v7niqp$13ghd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7obbn$17h8r$1@dont-email.me> <v7qfcv$1lsne$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7qvj1$1onhe$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 20:34:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6baae70b43533c393927066b90d71c14";
	logging-data="1951751"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19bQdyO5xj7l5Bp9cKHbav2"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jQdHSw1rxtaa3BD+bUlw0ZylbVs=
In-Reply-To: <v7qvj1$1onhe$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 10092

Op 24.jul.2024 om 15:29 schreef olcott:
> On 7/24/2024 3:52 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 23.jul.2024 om 15:31 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/23/2024 1:32 AM, 0 wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-22 13:46:21 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/22/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-07-21 13:34:40 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/21/2024 4:34 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-20 13:11:03 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 7/20/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-19 14:08:24 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When we use your incorrect reasoning we would conclude
>>>>>>>>>>> that Infinite_Loop() is not an infinite loop because it
>>>>>>>>>>> only repeats until aborted and is aborted.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You and your HHH can reason or at least conclude correctly about
>>>>>>>>>> Infinite_Loop but not about DDD. Possibly because it prefers to
>>>>>>>>>> say "no", which is correct about Infinte_loop but not about DDD.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Because this is true I don't understand how you are not simply 
>>>>>>>>> lying*
>>>>>>>>> int main
>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>    DDD();
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Calls HHH(DDD) that must abort the emulation of its input
>>>>>>>>> or {HHH, emulated DDD and executed DDD} never stop running.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are the lying one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If HHH(DDD) abrots its simulation and returns true it is correct 
>>>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>> halt decider for DDD really halts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (b) We know that a decider is not allowed to report on the behavior
>>>>>>> computation that itself is contained within.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, we don't. There is no such prohibition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Turing machines never take actual Turing machines as inputs.
>>>>> They only take finite strings as inputs and an actual executing
>>>>> Turing machine is not itself a finite string.
>>>>
>>>> The definition of a Turing machine does not say that a Turing machine
>>>> is not a finite string. It is an abstract mathematical object without
>>>> a specification of its exact nature. It could be a set or a finite
>>>> string. Its exact nature is not relevant to the theory of computation,
>>>> which only cares about certain properties of Turing machines.
>>>>
>>>>> Therefore It is not allowed to report on its own behavior.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, that does not follow. The theory of Turing machines does not
>>>> prohibit anything.
>>>>
>>>>> Another different TM can take the TM description of this
>>>>> machine and thus accurately report on its actual behavior.
>>>>
>>>> If a Turing machine can take a description of a TM as its input
>>>> or as a part of its input it can also take its own description.
>>>> Every Turing machine can be given its own description as input
>>>> but a Turing machine may interprete it as something else.
>>>>
>>> In this case we have two x86utm machines that are identical
>>> except that DDD calls HHH and DDD does not call HHH1.
>>>
>>> It is empirically proven that this changes their behavior
>>> and the behavior of DDD.
>>>
>>
>> The x86 code is exactly the same, therefore, the semantics of the x86 
>> does not change, which proves that your claim that HHH works according 
>> to the semantics of the x86 language is not true.
> 
> *HHH1(DDD) need not aborted because HHH(DDD) must be aborted*

HHH aborts (whether it must or not is irrelevant, it does).
Therefore there is no need to abort the simulation of HHH.
HHH1 proves that I am right, because when HHH1 simulates DDD, it also 
simulates HHH called by DDD.
This proves that it is incorrect to abort the simulation of HHH.
However, HHH cannot do anything else than abort the simulation of 
itself, because that is how it is coded.
HHH is incorrect when it aborts a simulation that would halt by its own. 
The simulation of HHH by itself is incomplete and therefore incorrect.
The conclusion must be: HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly.

> This is your last chance before I ignore everything you say.

What is the problem? Are you unable to understand what I say, or are you 
unwilling to understand what I say?
Which of the above steps are too difficult for you to understand?

> 
> int main()
> {
>    HHH1(DDD);
> }
> 
> _DDD()
> [00002177] 55         push ebp
> [00002178] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000217a] 6877210000 push 00002177
> [0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d7
> [00002184] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [00002187] 5d         pop ebp
> [00002188] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002188]
> 
> _main()
> [00002197] 55         push ebp
> [00002198] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000219a] 6877210000 push 00002177
> [0000219f] e863f3ffff call 00001507
> [000021a4] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000021a7] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000021a9] 5d         pop ebp
> [000021aa] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0020) [000021aa]
> 
>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>   address   address   data      code       language
>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> [00002197][001037fb][00000000] 55         push ebp
> [00002198][001037fb][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000219a][001037f7][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
> [0000219f][001037f3][000021a4] e863f3ffff call 00001507 ; call HHH1
> New slave_stack at:10389f
> 
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138a7
> [00002177][00113897][0011389b] 55         push ebp
> [00002178][00113897][0011389b] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000217a][00113893][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
> [0000217f][0011388f][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
> New slave_stack at:14e2c7
> 
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:15e2cf
> [00002177][0015e2bf][0015e2c3] 55         push ebp
> [00002178][0015e2bf][0015e2c3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000217a][0015e2bb][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
> [0000217f][0015e2b7][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
> New slave_stack at:198cef
> [00002177][001a8ce7][001a8ceb] 55         push ebp
> [00002178][001a8ce7][001a8ceb] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [0000217a][001a8ce3][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
> [0000217f][001a8cdf][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

There was no infinite recursion, because HHH aborts after two cycles.
HHH is simply unable to see the difference between infinite recursion 
and finite recursion of more than two cycles.

========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========