Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The actual code of HHH
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 15:42:21 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <vpqm7t$39kqb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <f73c3b97590a4d189e33a2cf255ed3337e56d3cf@i2pn2.org>
 <vpo6v9$2p51t$1@dont-email.me> <vppb4e$323f6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpq0cr$35jvb$3@dont-email.me> <vpqdet$382vq$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 22:42:21 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="88d6e0d555344fd97069a3585b949a3d";
	logging-data="3461963"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19hqjNTWuX7Ne9vLXxsYlDp"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0pOZynFg9qSQTHcRwJr3rJ0Av+k=
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <vpqdet$382vq$1@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250227-10, 2/27/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 3855

On 2/27/2025 1:12 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 27.feb.2025 om 16:29 schreef olcott:
>> On 2/27/2025 3:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 27.feb.2025 om 00:09 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 2/26/2025 3:52 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Since there is so much talk around, but not really about it,
>>>>> let's take a look:
>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/
>>>>> 48b4cbfeb3f486507276a5fc4e9b10875ab24dbf/Halt7.c#L1081
>>>>> In line 1137, we compute a flag:
>>>>> u32 Root = Init_Halts_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded, 
>>>>> &code_end,
>>>>> (u32)P, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack);
>>>>> In line 918, we find it basically checks for the magic number
>>>>> **execution_trace==0x90909090. What is this unexplained value?
>>>>>
>>>>> We then pass the saved flag in line 1143:
>>>>> if (Decide_Halting_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded,
>>>>> code_end, End_Of_Code, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack, 
>>>>> Root)),
>>>>> defined in line 1030.
>>>>> Then we get a switch:
>>>>> 1059    if (Root)  // Master UTM halt decider
>>>>> Line 1070 is then conditionally skipped:
>>>>> Needs_To_Be_Aborted_HH((Decoded_Line_Of_Code*)**execution_trace);
>>>>> defined in line 1012, which (on a jmp or call instruction) calls
>>>>> u32 Needs_To_Be_Aborted_Trace_HH(Decoded_Line_Of_Code* 
>>>>> execution_trace,
>>>>>                                   Decoded_Line_Of_Code *current)
>>>>> in line 964, where the abort logic lives. (It basically triggers
>>>>> on a call or jump to itself.)
>>>>>
>>>>> So we only abort depending on the address of the execution trace.
>>>>> This makes no sense. Why is that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DD emulated by HHH according to the behavior that the x86
>>>> machine code of DD cannot possibly terminate normally thus
>>>> HHH is infallibly correct to report that this DD emulated
>>>> by HHH (not any other DD in the whole freaking universe)
>>>> is not-terminating.
>>> No, it is correct to report that HHH is unable to correctly simulate 
>>> this halting program up to its end.
>>
>> In other words you are totally clueless that infinite
>> recursion HAS NO END.
> In other words Olcott is dreaming again of an infinite recursion, where 
> it has been proven by the direct execution that the aborting HHH has no 
> infinite recursion. It HAS AN END! Dreams are no substitute for logic.

It is flat out dishonest to change the subject away
from DD emulated by HHH.

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer