Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2025 11:14:59 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <vqh1qj$2ph1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vq5qqc$1j128$2@dont-email.me> <vq6l3k$1r2p8$1@dont-email.me> <vq72iv$1tapm$3@dont-email.me> <vqbkqs$2t20u$1@dont-email.me> <vqcvhm$34c3r$2@dont-email.me> <vqeaiu$3eos7$1@dont-email.me> <vqf1ik$3j68u$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:15:00 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="31447595eaef0533ab17be3120d39290";
	logging-data="91681"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/jXs2o2I02UUX9SjdWPANt"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tVGvGzp88E2gzGQ832mhwdaCZSo=
Bytes: 3984

On 2025-03-07 14:58:28 +0000, olcott said:

> On 3/7/2025 2:26 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-03-06 20:11:34 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 3/6/2025 2:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-03-04 14:26:39 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 3/4/2025 4:36 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-03-04 03:07:56 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _DD()
>>>>>>> [00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>>>> [00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>>>> [00002136] 51         push ecx      ; make space for local
>>>>>>> [00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD
>>>>>>> [0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD)
>>>>>>> [00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>>>> [00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
>>>>>>> [00002147] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
>>>>>>> [0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f
>>>>>>> [0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d
>>>>>>> [0000214f] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
>>>>>>> [00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
>>>>>>> [00002154] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>>>> [00002155] c3         ret
>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>>>>>> reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The only valid rebuttal is to show all of the steps of
>>>>>>> exactly how DD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its
>>>>>>> own "ret" instruction.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The question whether DD emulated by HHH exists is too uninteresting that
>>>>>> it would need a rebuttal, and so is the question that does it reach its
>>>>>> "ret" instruction if it exsists.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>>>> reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.
>>>>> *Proves that the input to HHH(DD) can be rejected as non-halting*
>>>> 
>>>> As "DD correctly emulated by HHH" does not exist
>>> 
>>> *No one has made any attempt to show that*
>> 
>> Maybe not. Perhaps every demonstration of that was just a byproduct of
>> some other attempt. Anyway, HHH does not emulate DD correctly to the end.
> 
> Simulating termination analyzer HHH simulates its input DD until HHH 
> correctly determines that DD cannot possibly reach its own "return" 
> instruction and terminate normally.

Yes, but your HHH does not. In particular, it never correctly determines
that DD cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction and terminate
normally. It is already known that DD does reach its own "return"
instruction and terminates normally when linked with your HHH.

-- 
Mikko