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: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Formal systems that cannot possibly be incomplete except for
 unknowns and unknowable
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 16:56:38 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <vvgkum$18q46$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me>
 <b47c9e70d415c1e5e469aaab846f0bd05e4bcc51@i2pn2.org>
 <vvall0$o6v5$1@dont-email.me> <vvc33h$25atc$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvcgja$1voc$1@news.muc.de> <vvd6pf$34l9k$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvdads$13pc$1@news.muc.de> <vvdcld$3arjo$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvg6r9$15e69$1@dont-email.me> <vvg7uu$158tp$4@dont-email.me>
 <vvg8tk$15e69$4@dont-email.me> <vvgai8$158tp$6@dont-email.me>
 <vvgcme$15e69$9@dont-email.me> <vvgjdo$18i6e$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvgkao$18q46$1@dont-email.me> <vvgkd7$15i5e$23@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 23:56:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ee5137430f56269cd3e6381ddf24cf46";
	logging-data="1337478"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX190J1sAfS0HTe3m391U85GC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2WbOm6yFuv68p/NkkjMU8R2z52M=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vvgkd7$15i5e$23@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250507-4, 5/7/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 3800

On 5/7/2025 4:47 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 5/7/2025 5:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2025 4:30 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 07/05/2025 20:35, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2025 1:59 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>> On 07/05/2025 19:31, olcott wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I already know that the contradictory part of the
>>>>>> counter-example input has always been unreachable code.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the code is unreachable, it can't be part of a working program, 
>>>>> so simply remove it.
>>>>
>>>> It is unreachable by the Halting Problem counter-example
>>>> input D when correctly simulated by the simulating
>>>> termination analyzer H that it has been defined to thwart.
>>>
>>> If the simulation can't reach code that the directly executed program 
>>> reaches, then it's not a faithful simulation.
>>>
>>
>> If is was true that it is not a faithful simulation
>> then you would be able to show exactly what sequence
>> of instructions would be a faithful simulation.
> 
> 
> The sequence executed by HHH1, as you are on record as admitting is 
> correct:
> 

What exact sequence of the following machine addresses
of DD emulated by HHH causes DD to reach its own
final halt state at machine address [00002155]

When this sequence is required to conform to the
rules of the x86 language?

_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]

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