Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 02:25:22 +0000
Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H ###
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v1avuv$2lks2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1b7gl$2ndka$1@dont-email.me> <v1cla9$34iis$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1d2mi$9f72$11@i2pn2.org> <v1di1h$3b2m5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1dtdv$3dqg4$1@dont-email.me> <v1du2i$3dt7u$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1fetd$3s7jo$1@dont-email.me> <v1ft42$3vdau$2@dont-email.me>
 <-5Gdnf-nQvstC6b7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v1gid8$4ilc$1@dont-email.me>
 <S3adnSAsJp_xoKH7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v1hgvb$en3a$1@dont-email.me>
 <9j2dnYHCe-4pwqD7nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v1jrvp$vhj6$1@dont-email.me>
From: Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 03:25:21 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.17
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <v1jrvp$vhj6$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <xwmdnTTil-QOGKD7nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 211
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Tzlui3Ao14MIeo4MDSVJ9m06sp7ExZLAkc0rfZ9659iCfu4t49ikmc7qmS4SF2rG/ruDIH2Cd4WMEHs!jJnDrflczda1AjHoWyZsiwfgHHREu49dSJRMmYOQfWr46vu9iNIBYl3kM+yBfduUeoWq6dSmnSJH!NVlR6VtZqpNEBvvKHR4eOeDCxlFV
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 12057

On 10/05/2024 02:07, olcott wrote:
> On 5/9/2024 6:43 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 09/05/2024 04:46, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2024 10:05 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>> On 08/05/2024 20:05, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/8/2024 10:13 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>> On 08/05/2024 14:01, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/8/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-07 19:05:54 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/7/2024 1:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 07.mei.2024 om 17:40 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/7/2024 6:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/7/24 3:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-06 18:28:37 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/6/2024 11:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-05 17:02:25 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The x86utm operating system: https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm enables
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one C function to execute another C function in debug step mode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simulating Termination analyzer H simulates the x86 machine code of its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input (using libx86emu) in debug step mode until it correctly matches a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct non-halting behavior pattern proving that its input will never
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stop running unless aborted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can D correctly simulated by H terminate normally?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The above execution trace proves that (for every H/D pair of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinite set of H/D pairs) each D(D) simulated by the H that this D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calls cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When you say "every H/D pair" you should specify which set of pairs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are talking about. As you don't, your words don't mean anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every H/D pair in the universe where D(D) is simulated by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same H(D,D) that D(D) calls. This involves 1 to ∞ steps of D
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and also includes zero to ∞ recursive simulations where H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H simulates itself simulating D(D).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "In the universe" is not a set. In typical set theories like ZFC there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no universal set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This template defines an infinite set of finite string H/D pairs where each D(D) that is 
>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by H(D,D) also calls this same H(D,D).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> These H/D pairs can be enumerated by the one to ∞ simulated steps of D and involve zero 
>>>>>>>>>>> to ∞ recursive simulations of H simulating itself simulating D(D). Every time Lines 1,2,3 
>>>>>>>>>>> are simulated again defines
>>>>>>>>>>> one more level of recursive simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1st element of H/D pairs 1 step  of D  is simulated by H
>>>>>>>>>>> 2nd element of H/D pairs 2 steps of D are simulated by H
>>>>>>>>>>> 3rd element of H/D pairs 3 steps of D are simulated by H
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 4th element of H/D pairs 4 steps of D are simulated by H
>>>>>>>>>>> this begins the first recursive simulation at line 01
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 5th element of H/D pairs 5 steps of D are simulated by
>>>>>>>>>>> next step of the first recursive simulation at line 02
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 6th element of H/D pairs 6 steps of D are simulated by
>>>>>>>>>>> last step of the first recursive simulation at line 03
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 7th element of H/D pairs 7 steps of D are simulated by H
>>>>>>>>>>> this begins the second recursive simulation at line 01
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is this the definition of the infinite set of H? We can think of many more simulations 
>>>>>>>>>> that only these.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This template defines an infinite set of finite string H/D pairs where
>>>>>>>>> each D(D) that is simulated by H(D,D) also calls this same H(D,D).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No-one can possibly show one element of this set where D(D) reaches
>>>>>>>>> past its own line 03.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If H is a decider of any kind then the D build from it reaches its line
>>>>>>>> 4 as numberd above. Whether the simulation of D by H reaches that line
>>>>>>>> is another question.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *My fully operational code proves otherwise*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I seems like you guys don't have a clue about how infinite
>>>>>>> recursion works. You can run the code and see that I am correct.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have one concrete instance as fully operational code.
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>> line 555 u32 HH(ptr P, ptr I) its input in on
>>>>>>> line 932 int DD(int (*x)())
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HH is completely broken - it uses a global variable which is allows HH to detect whether it is 
>>>>>> the outer HH or a nested (simulated) HH. As a result, the nested HH behaves completely 
>>>>>> differently to the outer HH - I mean /completely/ differently: it goes through a totally 
>>>>>> separate "I am called in nested mode" code path!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The encoding of HH is not the pure function that it needs to be to
>>>>> be a computable function.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Maybe you can settle this*
>>>>>
>>>>> The disagreement is entirely over an enormously much simpler thing.
>>>>> The disagreement is that Richard says that a D simulated by H could
>>>>> reach past its own line 03 and halt.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll respond with my assessment on this, provided you agree in advance that you won't quote me 
>>>> elsewhere [in other threads/forums] in support of your claims.  Not that I can really enforce 
>>
>> ..NOTE: not in other THREADS or forums, i.e. NOT in other threads on these newsgroups.  (Just in 
>> this specific thread, where what I say will be quoted automatically by your newsreader!  I can't 
>> see why you would quote me in other threads anyway other than in some kind of attempt to shut down 
>> discussion in your favour...)
>>
>>>> this, but I think for the most part you are basically honest, and would try to keep an agreement 
>>>> you made on this, if you chose to make one.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is really great Mike, you have been a wonderful help.
>>> I will agree not to quote you anywhere else but these two
>>> forums and I am nearly certain that I never quoted anyone
>>> else from these forums anywhere else besides these forums.
>>>
>>>> You understand the reason I ask this:  you are unfortunately completely unable to judge what 
>>>> other people say to you, and as soon as you (mis)interpret the smallest thing as supporting some 
>>>> part of your argument you will (mis)quote "Mike Terry [or whoever] agrees that [something I did 
>>>> not agree to, or some literal quote taken out of context, which misrepresents my actual opinion]."
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK, so I agree that I will only quote you using the message ID
>>> of your reply with its time/date stamp and I will only quote
>>> you in these forums. 
>>
>> My condition is "only in THIS THREAD"...
>>
>> Mike.
> 
> So I cannot post the entire dialogue of everything you
> said along with a time/date stamp of your full reply
> and its message ID in a different thread in this forum?
> 
> My issue is that too many people in this forum insist
> on directly contradicting the easily verified facts
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========