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: Defining a correct simulating halt decider
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 09:09:14 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <vbce2a$c3a0$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4plc$2tqeg$1@dont-email.me> <vb4u1g$2u7sn$4@dont-email.me>
 <vb59cg$3057o$1@dont-email.me>
 <f0ff8a5345087a3b89853b26af12e38d433afc7b@i2pn2.org>
 <vb7l68$3efl8$1@dont-email.me>
 <e31c9b03d979de12131d3043f3f09dcd94273e7e@i2pn2.org>
 <vb7rbl$3fd42$1@dont-email.me> <vb99qf$3plip$3@dont-email.me>
 <vb9m01$3rh1t$2@dont-email.me> <vbc0sg$9vqh$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:09:15 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="43b31a63184850aec0f50fc55161dc88";
	logging-data="396608"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18UZIAQ+mcl06Q6k/cRVOsr"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D/gGjv+3YjivydolHFQafuK3Ex0=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vbc0sg$9vqh$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3883

On 9/5/2024 5:24 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 04.sep.2024 om 15:06 schreef olcott:
>> On 9/4/2024 4:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 03.sep.2024 om 22:25 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 9/3/2024 2:01 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Tue, 03 Sep 2024 13:40:08 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 9/3/2024 9:42 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Mon, 02 Sep 2024 16:06:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 9/2/2024 12:52 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 02.sep.2024 om 18:38 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from
>>>>>>>>>> its finite string input to the behavior that this finite string
>>>>>>>>>> specifies.
>>>>>>>>>> If the finite string machine string machine description specifies
>>>>>>>>>> that it cannot possibly reach its own final halt state then this
>>>>>>>>>> machine description specifies non-halting behavior.
>>>>>>> Which DDD does not.
>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its final halt state no 
>>>>>> matter
>>>>>> what HHH does.
>>>>> But DDD halts, so it „specifies halting behaviour”.
>>>>> HHH can’t simulate itself.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> HHH does simulate itself simulating DDD
>>>> why do you insist on lying about this?
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>> HHH *tries* to simulate itself, but it fails to reach the end of its 
>>> simulation of the halting program.
>>
>> The source code proves otherwise that you are not bright
>> enough to understand this code is no rebuttal at all.
>>
> Olcott's only rebuttal is a ad hominem attacks.
> No evidence for another incorrect claim.
> Even olcott agreed that HHH cannot reach the end of DDD and now he 
> contradicts himself.



DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.
It looks like I have to repeat this 10,000 times before
anyone ever notices that I said it at least once.

_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]

Show the details of how DDD emulated by HHH
reaches its own machine address 0000217f.

00002172, 00002173, 00002175, 0000217a calls HHH(DDD)
then
00002172, 00002173, 00002175, 0000217a calls HHH(DDD)...

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