Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see...
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:42:47 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <v8j5qn$2ucuj$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v887np$gl15$1@dont-email.me> <v8a2j5$u4t6$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8asse$12hr3$2@dont-email.me> <v8cpti$1gav5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8dng8$1lmkb$1@dont-email.me> <v8iadk$2p1af$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 19:42:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="49c3b1279a491a49cbaeec74f647ee34";
	logging-data="3093459"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19tbmqd+Bji5ND5VDi6g7Rz"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Z9XMtZpfVJs5fmFFOibbyMtvSn4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v8iadk$2p1af$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4900

On 8/2/2024 4:55 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-07-31 16:07:34 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 7/31/2024 2:42 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-30 14:21:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 7/30/2024 1:52 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-07-29 14:07:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) show the same non-halting
>>>>>> behavior pattern in their derived execution traces of their
>>>>>> inputs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hard to believe as their behaviour is so different and you don't
>>>>> say what pattern the see.
>>>>
>>>> *Its all in the part that you erased*
>>>>
>>>> *Infinite_Recursion correctly emulated by HHH*
>>>> *THREE lines repeat with no conditional branch instructions*
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113934
>>>> [0000215a][00113924][00113928] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
>>>> [0000215b][00113924][00113928] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
>>>> [0000215d][00113920][00002162] e8f8ffffff call 0000215a ; 3rd line
>>>> [0000215a][0011391c][00113924] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
>>>> [0000215b][0011391c][00113924] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
>>>> [0000215d][00113918][00002162] e8f8ffffff call 0000215a ; 3rd line
>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>>
>>>> *DDD correctly emulated by HHH*
>>>> *FOUR lines repeat with no conditional branch instructions*
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113895
>>>> [00002177][00113885][00113889] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
>>>> [00002178][00113885][00113889] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
>>>> [0000217a][00113881][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000217f][0011387d][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
>>>> [00002177][0015e2ad][0015e2b1] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
>>>> [00002178][0015e2ad][0015e2b1] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
>>>> [0000217a][0015e2a9][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000217f][0015e2a5][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>
>>> As that part does not show the anwer it seems best to assume that they
>>> do not see the same pattern or the pattern is not a real non-halting
>>> behaviour pattern. Of course, if a proof is ever presented, we may need
>>> to reconsider, but it is very unlikely that any such proof will ever
>>> be presented.
>>>
>>
>> A proof is any sequence of steps such that the conclusion
>> is a necessary consequence of its basis.
>>
>> Proving that DDD correctly emulated by HHH matches the
>> infinite recursion behavior pattern.
>> (a) The semantics of the x86 language.
>> (b) the design of HHH provided below.
>> (c) The definition of infinite recursion provided below.
>>
>> *Infinite recursion behavior pattern*
>> An emulated sequence of instructions that has no conditional
>> branch instructions in this sequence is exactly repeated when
>> it calls the same function with the same parameters again.
>> As long as the called function can be determined to never
>> return this proves infinite recursion.
> 
> You have not proven that there is no conditional instructions
> in the repeated cycle.

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}

In other words you are too damn stupid to see that
DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach
its own return instruction?

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