Path: ...!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: Defining a correct simulating halt decider
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 11:07:29 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 110
Message-ID: <vbu7g1$5eiu$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4plc$2tqeg$1@dont-email.me> <vb6o5t$3a95s$1@dont-email.me> <vb71a3$3b4ub$4@dont-email.me> <vbbmuc$8nbb$1@dont-email.me> <vbcbe4$bdtb$3@dont-email.me> <vbeoge$q2ph$1@dont-email.me> <vbeprp$punj$7@dont-email.me> <c600a691fab10473128eed2a1fad2a429ad4733f@i2pn2.org> <vbh2sp$19ov0$1@dont-email.me> <vbhm3c$1c7u5$12@dont-email.me> <vbkdph$1v80k$1@dont-email.me> <vbne7e$2g6vo$6@dont-email.me> <vbpbps$2uib0$1@dont-email.me> <vbs055$3im2p$4@dont-email.me> <vbsg6n$3mme2$3@dont-email.me> <vbt5us$3rasr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 10:07:30 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="91f4cddf0d322860019ac3a2cba76d34";
	logging-data="178782"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19jWfQ1KegMHbdqvl3mgGRM"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+BlFtZjhWJSOImdCYuMYP/NJisw=
Bytes: 5419

On 2024-09-11 22:35:07 +0000, olcott said:

> On 9/11/2024 11:23 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 11.sep.2024 om 13:49 schreef olcott:
>>> On 9/10/2024 6:50 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.sep.2024 om 20:19 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 9/8/2024 9:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-09-07 13:57:00 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 9/7/2024 3:29 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-07 05:12:19 +0000, joes said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am Fri, 06 Sep 2024 06:42:48 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/6/2024 6:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-05 13:24:20 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/5/2024 2:34 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-03 13:00:50 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2024 5:25 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-02 16:38:03 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its finite string input to the behavior that this finite string
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A halt decider needn't compute the full behaviour, only whether
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that behaviour is finite or infinite.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New slave_stack at:1038c4 Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hence  HHH(DDD)==0 is correct
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice to see that you don't disagree with what said.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unvortunately I can't agree with what you say.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH terminates,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> os DDD obviously terminates, too. No valid
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> If that iis true it means that HHH called by DDD does not return and
>>>>>>>>>>> therefore is not a ceicder.
>>>>>>>>>> The directly executed HHH is a decider.
>>>>>>>>> What does simulating it change about that?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If the simulation is incorrect it may change anything.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
>>>>>>> PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
>>>>>>> PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
>>>>>>> PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
>>>>>>> PATHOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS CHANGE BEHAVIOR
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> However, a correct simultation faithfully imitates the original
>>>>>> behaviour.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _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]
>>>>> 
>>>>> A correct emulation obeys the x86 machine code even
>>>>> if this machine code catches the machine on fire.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is impossible for an emulation of DDD by HHH to
>>>>> reach machine address 00002183 AND YOU KNOW IT!!!
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It seems olcott also knows that HHH fails to reach the machine address 
>>>> 00002183, because it stop the simulation too soon.
>>> 
>>> No the issue is the you insist on remaining too stupid
>>> to understand unreachable code.
>>> 
>>> void Infinite_Recursion()
>>> {
>>>    Infinite_Recursion();
>>>    OutString("Can't possibly get here!");
>> 
>> Olcott keeps dreaming of infinite recursions, even when HHH aborts 
>> after two cycles. Two is not infinite.
>> 
> 
> Yet in this same way Infinite_Recursion() itself
> it not infinite when HHH aborts it in two cycles.
> 
> What makes Infinite_Recursion() non-halting even
> when it stops being emulated is that it cannot
> possibly reach past its own first instruction.

That

  int main(void) {

    Infinite_Recursion();
    return 0;

  }

never returns makes Infinite_Recursion non-halting.

-- 
Mikko