Path: ...!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: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never
 reaches its halt state ---
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:47:16 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 123
Message-ID: <v9ich5$f16v$7@dont-email.me>
References: <v8jh7m$30k55$1@dont-email.me>
 <cbde765b8f9e769930b6c8589556907a41d9c256@i2pn2.org>
 <v8lm80$3h8m2$3@dont-email.me> <v8n6mq$3tv07$3@dont-email.me>
 <v8o14v$30uf$1@dont-email.me>
 <950d4eed7965040e841a970d48d5b6f417ff43dc@i2pn2.org>
 <v8oj1n$6kik$3@dont-email.me> <v8pvke$ih0a$1@dont-email.me>
 <4-qdnbdw1JzlRS37nZ2dnZfqlJydnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <v8v7p3$29r2r$1@dont-email.me> <v8vub1$32fso$14@dont-email.me>
 <1e1fa9bc4bbc00aa65c1a7974bd1bda87687c92b@i2pn2.org>
 <v90di8$38oni$1@dont-email.me>
 <47a76378d634bf0db4017f879d0160793b57125e@i2pn2.org>
 <v9161o$3gaju$1@dont-email.me>
 <b84374e766c199e1ba38ef1dc3bc8f6ab2c39dfc@i2pn2.org>
 <v91i97$3n4m0$1@dont-email.me> <v91unh$3rbor$1@dont-email.me>
 <v92gja$p1$3@dont-email.me> <v94m0l$ljf4$1@dont-email.me>
 <v95ae9$p5rb$1@dont-email.me> <v978dv$h1ib$1@dont-email.me>
 <v97j0q$ilah$2@dont-email.me> <v99lpd$25ri3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9a88e$2923f$2@dont-email.me> <v9fer8$3rv02$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9fmkv$3ta4u$1@dont-email.me> <v9hn2f$ca0f$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 15:47:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0b9b77ee625b8578b747fee4cc5a1452";
	logging-data="492767"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+uUsdzHW6R3Jg6sZvWc5wG"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DOphcHVzwnGU5oKrTRY92PGGees=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v9hn2f$ca0f$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 6539

On 8/14/2024 2:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-08-13 13:21:32 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 8/13/2024 6:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-08-11 11:45:18 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 8/11/2024 1:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-08-10 11:30:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/10/2024 3:29 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-08-09 14:51:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2024 4:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-08-08 13:18:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Each HHH of every HHH that can possibly exist definitely
>>>>>>>>>> *emulates zero to infinity instructions correctly* In
>>>>>>>>>> none of these cases does the emulated DDD ever reach
>>>>>>>>>> its "return" instruction halt state.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The ranges of "each HHH" and "every HHH" are not defined above
>>>>>>>>> so that does not really mean anything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is something that literally does not mean anything:
>>>>>>>> "0i34ine ir m0945r (*&ubYU  I*(ubn)I*054 gfdpodf["
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks like encrypted text that might mean something.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This could be encrypted text, too, or perhaps refers to some
>>>>>>> inside knowledge or convention.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I defined an infinite set of HHH x86 emulators.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe somewnete but not in the message I commented.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I stipulated that each member of this set emulates
>>>>>>>> zero to infinity instructions of DDD.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That doesn't restrict much.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *I can't say it this way without losing 90% of my audience*
>>>>>>>> Each element of this set is mapped to one element of the
>>>>>>>> set of non-negative integers indicating the number of
>>>>>>>> x86 instructions of DDD that it emulates.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is easier to talk about mapping if is given a name.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *This one seems to be good*
>>>>>>>> Each element of this set corresponds to one element of
>>>>>>>> the set of positive integers indicating the number of
>>>>>>>> x86 instructions of DDD that it emulates.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That would mean that only a finite number (possibly zero) of
>>>>>>> instructions is emulated. But the restriction to DDD does not
>>>>>>> seem reasonable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The set of HHH x86 emulators are defined such that*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Each element of this set corresponds to one element of
>>>>>> the set of positive integers indicating the number of
>>>>>> x86 instructions of DDD that it correctly emulates.
>>>>>
>>>>> As we onece observed, this would be clearer with incdices.
>>>>> No journal woth of consideration will accept an article
>>>>> that uses the same name for a specific program and a set.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> void DDD()
>>>> {
>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>    return;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> None-the-less it is clear that of the above specified infinite
>>>> set DDD correctly emulated by each element of that set never
>>>> reaches its own "return" instruction halt state.
>>>
>>> To emulate an infinite set of DDD by infintely manu emulators
>>> is too much to actually do. However, one may pick a HHHᵤ and
>>> DDDᵥ so that HHHᵤ(DDDᵥ) correctly determines that DDDᵥ halts.
>>
>> Through something like mathematical induction we can directly
>> see that DDD correctly emulated by any HHH cannot possibly
>> reach its "return" instruction final halt state.
> 
> No, we don't see, at least as long as you don't show.
> 

_DDD()
[00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d         pop ebp
[00002183] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]

The impossibility of DDD emulated by HHH
(according to the semantics of the x86 language)
to reach its own machine address [00002183] is
compete proof.

We don't even need an actual HHH we only need
to imagine that HHH is a pure x86 emulator and
then anyone with sufficient expertise in the x86
language can see that DDD correctly emulated by
HHH never reaches machine address [00002183].


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