Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: III correctly emulated by EEE --- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 21:22:21 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <803bd062b0eb7345e153adbb3b76eea1a0307a18@i2pn2.org> References: <76e394abe71be9cdc7f1948e73352c4f76ae409e@i2pn2.org> <9adf9b9c30250aaa2d3142509036c892db2b7096@i2pn2.org> <211f9a2a284cb2deaa666f424c1ef826fe855e80@i2pn2.org> <3f250e699762cfe6fccc844f10eb04f32d470b6a@i2pn2.org> <8423998561d8feee807509b0ed6335123d35a7c9@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 01:22:49 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1909171"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 On 3/26/25 6:57 PM, olcott wrote: > On 3/26/2025 6:24 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/25/25 11:28 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/25/2025 7:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 3/25/25 8:12 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 3/24/2025 8:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 3/24/25 10:14 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/24/2025 6:23 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/23/25 9:06 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2025 6:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/25 6:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2025 4:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/25 1:21 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2025 6:07 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/25 11:52 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2025 9:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/25 2:08 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2025 12:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/25 1:31 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/2025 11:37 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sat, 22 Mar 2025 08:43:03 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)(); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     HHH(Infinite_Recursion); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no program DDD in the above code. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is also no Infinite_Recursion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since no Turing machine M can ever compute the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mapping from the behavior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of any directly executed TM2 referring to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the directly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> executed DDD has always been incorrect. Halt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deciders always report on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the behavior that their input finite string specifies. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please explain what behaviour the description of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TM "specifies", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and which TM the input describes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill sang a song" describes what Bill did. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A tape recording of Bill singing that same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> song completely specifies what Bill did. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And what a UTM does with this input completely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifies its behavior, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In every case that does not involve pathological >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> self- reference the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior that the finite string specifies is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coincidentally the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior as the direct execution of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corresponding machine. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual measure, however, has always been the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior that the finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> string input specifies. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...which is the direct execution. Not much of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coincidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _III() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp  ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push III >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call EEE(III) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add  esp,+04 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop  ebp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When-so-ever any correct emulator EEE correctly emulates >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a finite number of steps of an input III that calls this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same emulator to emulate itself the behavior of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> direct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution of III will not be the same as the behavior of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the emulated III. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Becuase a finite emulation that stop before the end is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not a correct emulation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words you keep dishonestly trying to get away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagreeing with the law of identity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When N steps are III are correctly emulated by EEE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then N steps are III are correctly emulated by EEE. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which isn't the same as the CORRECT emulation that shows >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if the program being emulated will halt/. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There exists no Natural Number N number of steps of III >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly emulated by EEE where III reaches its >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own "ret" instruction and terminates normally. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words you agree that the recursive emulation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a single finite string of x86 machine code single >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine address [00002172] cannot possibly reach its >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own machine address [00002183]when emulated by emulator >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EEE according to the semantics of the x86 language. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But it isn't a single finite string of x86 machince code, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As a matter of verified fact it is a single finite >>>>>>>>>>>>> string of machine code at a fixed offset in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Halt7.obj file. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, because DEFINTIONALLY, to correctly emulate it, you >>>>>>>>>>>> need ALL of it (at least all seen by the emulator) and thus >>>>>>>>>>>> you can't change the parts seen and still be talking about >>>>>>>>>>>> the same input. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Your claim just shows you are a patholgical liar. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You can not "correctly emulate" the code of just the >>>>>>>>>>>> function, you need the rest of the code, which mean you >>>>>>>>>>>> can't do the variations you talk about. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> x86utm operates on a compiled object file that >>>>>>>>>>> is stored in a single location of global memory. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Right, and thus you must consider *ALL* of that memory as the >>>>>>>>>> input, so if you change it, it is a different input. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You haven't yet noticed that all posts with this title >>>>>>>>> [III correctly emulated by EEE] are talking about a pure >>>>>>>>> emulator that emulates a finite number of instructions of III. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Which is just a strawman, and a contradiction, as the definition >>>>>>>> of "correct emulation" (to be able to use it in the halting >>>>>>>> problem as a surrogate for the programs behavior) must be complete. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _III() >>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp  ; housekeeping >>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push III >>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call EEE(III) >>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add  esp,+04 >>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop  ebp >>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret >>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>> ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========