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: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid
 rebuttals ---PSR---
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 22:10:42 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 161
Message-ID: <vqll7i$11p4p$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vq5qqc$1j128$2@dont-email.me> <vqb683$2mueq$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqb6f4$2lue4$4@dont-email.me> <vqb6qr$2mueq$3@dont-email.me>
 <27b6da57f540cd39d2918411d8c94789678e3f45@i2pn2.org>
 <vqcvu3$34c3r$5@dont-email.me>
 <24c66a3611456f6a6969dc132fd8a227b26cbcbd@i2pn2.org>
 <vqdlqp$371bi$6@dont-email.me> <vqeceq$3epcg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqf2bp$3j68u$4@dont-email.me> <vqh19v$2mh0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqhj3n$5r7r$3@dont-email.me> <vqhm4q$6fo8$3@dont-email.me>
 <vqhs03$6vdc$5@dont-email.me> <vqig6a$bcd0$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqihd5$bcso$2@dont-email.me> <vqii7c$bcd0$4@dont-email.me>
 <vqiju2$bcso$4@dont-email.me>
 <f667993f66e38ce7610b933bbbf13508dfee1e23@i2pn2.org>
 <vqj1m3$ef0h$3@dont-email.me>
 <81f99208ab5ac8261e19355d54de31bb0ba8cdc6@i2pn2.org>
 <vqk4t4$o4oh$4@dont-email.me>
 <af6a3bd08f89f22772743f9e0946d5cb663ddbc4@i2pn2.org>
 <vqkqkk$sf7f$1@dont-email.me>
 <2c05662d218a25329eec1fb052e96758227d094c@i2pn2.org>
 <vql4uq$uv13$2@dont-email.me>
 <ce80c9dc3a24d0ab0257e871338b59945526b563@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 04:10:50 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8d80c784efd0efabe57eb4c977e94182";
	logging-data="1107097"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/kXn2AAjejj75I35OpZ4KQ"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VTpEK3WqVDNUxE/M4PrFbYQ5k1U=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250309-4, 3/9/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <ce80c9dc3a24d0ab0257e871338b59945526b563@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 8631

On 3/9/2025 8:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/9/25 6:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/9/2025 4:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 3/9/25 3:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 3/9/2025 2:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 3/9/25 9:25 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/9/2025 6:17 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/8/25 10:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/25 6:30 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 5:01 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 5:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 4:26 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 11:41 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 9:01 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 9:09 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/8/2025 3:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-03-07 15:11:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The code proves otherwise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A program does not prove. In particular, it does not 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prove that no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different program exists.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code 100% perfectly proves exactly what it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually does. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code contains a finite sequence of truth 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserving steps between axioms and a statement?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The source code 100% completely specifies every single detail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of exactly what it does on each specific input.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Saying that it does not do this is counter-factual.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, the source code does not meet the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition of a proof, so your claim is false.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dumb Bunny:
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proof[0] is anything that shows that X is necessarily true*
>>>>>>>>>>>> *and thus impossibly false*
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The source-code in Halt7.c combined with the input to HHH
>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusively proves every detail of the behavior of HHH on
>>>>>>>>>>>> this input. Disagreeing this is either foolish or dishonest.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A proof is a finite sequence of truth preserving steps 
>>>>>>>>>>> between the axioms of a system and a true statement that show 
>>>>>>>>>>> the statement is true.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Proof[math] tries unsuccessfully to inherit from proof[0].
>>>>>>>>>> I am stipulating that I have always been referring to proof[0].
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And I am pointing out that it IS the same, it is just that you 
>>>>>>>>> don't understand that "Show" implies FINITE.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In that single aspect you are correct.
>>>>>>>> Show that X is definitely true and thus impossibly false
>>>>>>>> by any means what-so-ever is not proof[math].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> or proof[0], since you can not SHOW something "by any means" if 
>>>>>>> those means are not showable due to not being finite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are just proving your stupidity by repeating your disproved 
>>>>>>>>> claim.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you cannot understand the Halt7.c conclusively proves[0]
>>>>>>>>>> the actual behavior of HHH(DD) this is merely your lack of
>>>>>>>>>> understanding and nothing more.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sure I can understand what it does, as Halt7.c shows that the 
>>>>>>>>> behavior of the input is to HALT since that is what DD will do 
>>>>>>>>> when main calls it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *WHEN YOU UNDERSTAND THIS THEN YOU KNOW YOU WERE WRONG*
>>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>> its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally
>>>>>>>> because DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive emulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But The HHH You are talking about doesn't do a correct 
>>>>>>> simulation, so this statment is not applicable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _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]
>>>>>
>>>>> WHich is *NOT* a program, as it has an external reference.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *When we assume that HHH emulates N steps of DD then*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach
>>>>>> its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally
>>>>>> because DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive emulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong, because emulaiting for "N Steps" is NOT correctly emulation.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Correctly emulating N steps is emulating N steps correctly.
>>>
>>> Which is only partially emulating it correctly, and only partially 
>>> correct is incorrect.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Everyone here that has sufficient technical competence can
>>>> see that for any N steps of DD correctly emulated by HHH
>>>> that DD cannot possibly reach its own final state and
>>>> terminate normally.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> So? As has been pointed out, since HHH can't do enough steps to get 
>>> to the actual answer, it never CORRECTLY emulated the input enough to 
>>> get the answer if it aborts.
>>>
>>
>> If HHH can see the same pattern that every competent
>> programmer sees then HHH does not need to emulate DD
>> more than twice to know that HHH cannot possibly reach
>> its own final state and terminate normally.
>>
> 
> 
> The pattern that HHH sees is IDENTICAL to the pattern that HHH1 saw, up 
> to the point it aborts.
> 

In other words you do not believe that HHH can see what
every competent programmer sees.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========