Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?

On 5/24/24 4:07 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/24/2024 12:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/24/24 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/24/2024 4:03 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-05-23 17:04:49 +0000, olcott said:
>

typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
01       int D(ptr p)
02       {
03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
04         if (Halt_Status)
05           HERE: goto HERE;
06         return Halt_Status;
07       }
08
09       int main()
10       {
11         H(D,D);
12         return 0;
13       }
>
The above template refers to an infinite set of H/D pairs where D is
correctly simulated by pure function H. This was done because many
reviewers used the shell game ploy to endlessly switch which H/D pair
was being referred to.
>
*Correct Simulation Defined*
    This is provided because every reviewer had a different notion of
    correct simulation that diverges from this notion.
>
    A simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates at least one
    of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the x86
    instructions of D.
>
    This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in
    the order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D)
    in recursive simulation.
>
*Execution Trace*
    Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D); H(D,D) simulates lines 01, 02, and 03
    of D. This invokes H(D,D) again to repeat the process in endless
    recursive simulation.

>
One can see that D is never stuch in recursive simulation unless H is.

>
Counter-factual, please try again.

>
No, it is a PROVEN fact, as oposed your your unsound logic that tries to disprove it.
>
How can D(D) be stuck in "Recursive Simulation" unless the H(D,D) it calls is.

  When D is correctly simulated by pure function H where H eventually
halts and returns the meaningless 56 no D correctly simulated by
H ever reaches its final state at line 06 an halts
*BECAUSE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE WAS STUCK IN RECURSIVE SIMULATION*
 

So, you just admit that you "decider" returns a "meaningless" value,.
I guess you just admitted that you have been a liar that it was correctly determining the halting of its input.
And what do you mean by "Each and everyo one of these". Main can only call one function.
You are just admitting that you don't understand how programs work.
That has been your fundamental problem, you just makeup idea of how the theory works because you never understood any of it.
Your reply just shows how meaningless everything you say is, until you acutually clearly define what you mean by you statement.
After all, Halting is a property of a SPECIFIC program, not an infinite set of "things", so you are just talking non-sense.