Sujet : Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V2
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 17. Jul 2024, 14:43:04
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v78hp8$1rc43$11@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/17/2024 8:35 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 17.jul.2024 om 15:02 schreef olcott:
On 7/17/2024 1:48 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-16 15:57:04 +0000, olcott said:
>
>
New slave_stack at:1038c4
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
[00002172][001138bc][001138c0] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002173][001138bc][001138c0] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002175][001138b8][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
New slave_stack at:14e2ec
[00002172][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002173][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002175][0015e2e0][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][0015e2dc][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
The trace does not show that HHH returns so there is no basis to
think that HHH is a decider.
>
>
The trace shows the data of the executed program of HHH that
does halt.
>
It shows some of the data, not all, and in particular, not the halting.
>
>
_DDD()
[00002163] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
[00002170] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d pop ebp
[00002174] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
>
DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantic meaning of
its x86 instructions never stop running unless aborted.
>
>
You have shown that you do not understand the semantics of the x86 language.
HHH does abort and halt after N cycles,
That is counter-factual
When we examine the infinite set of every HHH/DDD pair such that:
HHH1 One step of DDD is correctly emulated by HHH
HHH2 Two steps of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH
HHH3 Three steps of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH
...
HHH∞ The emulation of DDD by HHH never stops
*THIS IS SELF EVIDENT THUS DISAGREEMENT IS INCORRECT*
DDD emulated by any pure function HHH according to the
semantic meaning of its x86 instructions never stops
running unless aborted.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer