Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.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,sci.logic
Subject: THREE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:52:57 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <veuvt9$3hnjq$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ves6p1$2uoln$1@dont-email.me>
 <3232d8a0cc7b5d4bba46321bf682c94573bf1b7c@i2pn2.org>
 <vesemu$2v7sh$1@dont-email.me>
 <a9fb95eb0ed914d0d9775448c005111eb43f2c5b@i2pn2.org>
 <veslpf$34ogr$1@dont-email.me>
 <647fe917c6bc0cfc78083ccf927fe280acdf2f9d@i2pn2.org>
 <vetq7u$3b8r2$1@dont-email.me>
 <522ecce215e636ddb7c9a1f75bff1ba466604cc5@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 02:52:58 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a2f4596ff028e636d7320aa11ac5f85c";
	logging-data="3726970"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+wVhOMGnHlasTb1pcDSYZ6"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ar/D5DAaYSlyqarOWXyYffXQCWw=
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241018-10, 10/18/2024), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <522ecce215e636ddb7c9a1f75bff1ba466604cc5@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4936

On 10/18/2024 6:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/18/24 10:10 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/18/2024 6:17 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/17/24 11:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/17/2024 10:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/17/24 9:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/17/2024 8:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/17/24 7:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> _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]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When DDD is correctly emulated by HHH according
>>>>>>>> to the semantics of the x86 language DDD cannot
>>>>>>>> possibly reach its own machine address [00002183]
>>>>>>>> no matter what HHH does.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +-->[00002172]-->[00002173]-->[00002175]-->[0000217a]--+
>>>>>>>> +------------------------------------------------------+
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That may not line up that same way when view
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_diagram
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Except that 0000217a doesn't go to 00002172, but to 000015d2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IS THIS OVER YOUR HEAD?
>>>>>> What is the first machine address of DDD that HHH
>>>>>> emulating itself emulating DDD would reach?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, HHH EMULATES the code at that address, 
>>>>
>>>> Which HHH emulates what code at which address?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Everyone, just once, which you should know, but ignore.
>>>
>>> The Emulating HHH sees those addresses at its begining and then never 
>>> again.
>>>
>>> Then the HHH that it is emulating will see those addresses, but not 
>>> the outer one that is doing that emulation of HHH.
>>>
>>> Then the HHH that the second HHH is emulating will, but neither of 
>>> the outer 2 HHH.
>>>
>>> And so on.
>>>
>>> Which HHH do you think EVER gets back to 00002172?
>>>
>>> What instruction do you think that it emulates that would tell it to 
>>> do so?
>>>
>>> It isn't the call instruction at 0000217a, as that tells it to go 
>>> into HHH.
>>>
>>> At best the trace is:
>>>
>>> 00002172
>>> 00002173
>>> 00002175
>>> 0000217a
>>> conditional emulation of 00002172
>>> conditional emulation of 00002173
>>> conditional emulation of 00002175
>>> conditional emulation of 0000217a
>>> CE of CE of 00002172
>>> ...
>>>
>>
>> OK great this is finally good progress.
>>
>>> The "state" never repeats, it is alway a new state, 
>>
>> Every emulated DDD has an identical process state at every point
>> in its emulation trace when adjusting for different top of stack values.
> 
> 
> Nope, remember, each of those levels are CONDITIONAL, 

*There are THREE different questions here*
(1) Can DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics
     of the x86 language possibly reach its machine address
     [00002183] no matter what HHH does?

(2) Does HHH correctly detect and report the above?

(3) Does HHH do (2) it as a Turing computable function?



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