Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Fred. Zwarts" Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1 Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 10:18:27 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 64 Message-ID: References: <211f9a2a284cb2deaa666f424c1ef826fe855e80@i2pn2.org> <3f250e699762cfe6fccc844f10eb04f32d470b6a@i2pn2.org> <8423998561d8feee807509b0ed6335123d35a7c9@i2pn2.org> <448c82acff6b5fc1d2aa266be92df6f778ec2c6a@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 10:18:26 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="13640222a42b83ce918b512af2679e23"; logging-data="930899"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18co5xvz/vCsJM0hOxN5INn" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:jaq0KmS9MbdT+ZSEFp+ViFCodbk= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: nl, en-GB Op 28.mrt.2025 om 19:45 schreef olcott: > On 3/28/2025 4:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 28.mrt.2025 om 00:39 schreef olcott: >>> On 3/27/2025 2:56 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 27.mrt.2025 om 18:50 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 3/27/2025 2:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 27.mrt.2025 om 04:09 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 3/26/2025 8:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _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] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Non-Halting is that the machine won't reach its final staste >>>>>>>> even if an unbounded number of steps are emulated. Since HHH >>>>>>>> doesn't do that, it isn't showing non-halting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH will never reach its final state >>>>>>> in an unbounded number of steps. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH1 reaches its final state in a finite >>>>>>> number of steps. >>>>>>> >>>>>> It is not very interesting to know whether a simulator reports >>>>>> that it is unable to reach the end of the simulation of a program >>>>>> that halts in direct execution. >>>>> >>>>> That IS NOT what HHH is reporting. >>>>> HHH correctly rejects DDD because DDD correctly >>>>> emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own >>>>> final halt state. >>>> >>>> Yes, that is the same in other words as rejecting because it could >>>> not correctly simulate the input up to its end. >>> >>> It doesn't have an end dumb bunny. >>> >> >> Open your eyes. It has an end, > > Perpetually insisting on the strawman deception > may get you condemned to actual Hell. > https://biblehub.com/revelation/21-8.htm > > DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 > language cannot possibly reach it own final halt state. > It is not very interesting to know whether a simulator reports that it is unable to reach the end of the simulation of a program that halts in direct execution. It is interesting to know: 'Is there an algorithm that can determine for all possible inputs whether the input specifies a program that (according to the semantics of the machine language) halts when directly executed?' This question seems undecidable for Olcott.