Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD) Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 11:44:31 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 123 Message-ID: References: <1020d30c2c5b5a7cce584777131d5ce414b480ea.camel@gmail.com> <0323d5ca6d757a1e35d7e4cf5eb4fc8f41bc866a.camel@gmail.com> <9f5774bfb493325652f97d72f760ad98442c333d.camel@gmail.com> <84b09a0d53d77e2a8fddf567226d05c0d65e60c0.camel@gmail.com> <235107421488220fb79fa83cbe8bf44709f6445a.camel@gmail.com> <83120a5793367c0231c0ecef701f26c51d35055b.camel@gmail.com> <6c1097059277dfa8e34acb2e607242a5d6e9d707.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 18:44:32 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7be348abb5bc2ec0a70724586a3ca680"; logging-data="3818971"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19MNEgsTT7oghXBbdDbFHIU" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:+NV2FLKTHQ0uz/4BjUYLXmgjxKk= X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250510-2, 5/10/2025), Outbound message Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Bytes: 6833 On 5/10/2025 11:21 AM, wij wrote: > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 11:15 -0500, olcott wrote: >> On 5/10/2025 11:00 AM, wij wrote: >>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 10:43 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/10/2025 10:14 AM, wij wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 09:51 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 5/10/2025 1:19 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 01:06 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/10/2025 1:00 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 00:41 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2025 12:27 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 00:19 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2025 12:13 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 00:06 -0500, olcott wrote:>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When mathematical mapping is properly understood >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it will be known that functions computed by models >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of computation must transform their input into >>>>>>>>>>>>>> outputs according to the specific steps of an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> algorithm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example HHH(DDD) only correctly map to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior that its input actually specifies by correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulating DDD according to the rules of the x86 language. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This causes the first four instructions of DDD >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be emulated followed by HHH emulating itself >>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulating the first three instructions of DDD. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is right at this recursive simulation just >>>>>>>>>>>>>> before HHH(DDD) is called again that HHH recognizes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the repeating pattern and rejects DDD. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but you still did not answer the question: Is POOH exactly about HP? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>       >>>>> H(D)=1 if D() halt. >>>>>>>>>>>>       >>>>> H(D)=0 if D() not halt. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Right now it is mostly about proving the >>>>>>>>>>>> above requirements are is mistaken. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Why is the requirement invalid? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> H(D)=1 if D() halt. >>>>>>>>>>> H(D)=0 if D() not halt. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The notion that the behavior specified by the finite >>>>>>>>>> string input to a simulating termination analyzer >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> POOH reads(takes) its input as a function, not 'finite string'. >>>>>>>>> Are you talking about POOH now? There is no POOH that takes >>>>>>>>> 'finite string'. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It a finite string of x86 bytes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Disagree. >>>>>>> The D in Halt7.c (I just saw once) does not treat H as 'finite string', >>>>>>> D calls H. H also does not treat D as 'finite string'. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> HHH and DDD and DD are the most recent functions. >>>>>> HHH does emulate its finite strings of x86 machine code >>>>>> according to the rules of the x86 language. >>>>> >>>>> This is from a copy of Halt7.c: >>>>> >>>>> void P(ptr x) >>>>> { >>>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x); >>>>>     if (Halt_Status) >>>>>       HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>     return; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> int main() >>>>> { >>>>>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(P, P)); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> H reads a *pointer*. >>>>> In P, P *calls* H. >>>>> >>>>> Both do not process 'finite string'. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What it is it a pointer to a box of chocolates? >>>> finite strings are passed as pointers to finite >>>> string in C. >>> >>> Nope. I don't believe it is a pointer to chocolates, even if you say so. >>> It is about the code of D/H itself. They do not process string, the fact says >>> the author of the program does not intend to process 'string'. >>> >> >> The input to HHH(DDD) is a pointer to a finite string >> of machine code. HHH applies an x86 emulator to this >> finite string. > > Do you read English? Do D/H read and process 'finite string'? > Like I have always said... DD, and DDD are finite strings of x86 machine code and HHH emulates these according to the x86 language. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer