Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 29. Jul 2024, 13:59:59
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v883of$g39i$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/29/2024 2:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-28 23:54:54 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 7/28/2024 4:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-27 18:20:19 +0000, olcott said:
>
On 7/27/2024 1:14 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Stopping running is not the same as halting.
DDD emulated by HHH stops running when its emulation has been aborted.
This is not the same as reaching its ret instruction and terminating
normally (AKA halting).
>
I think you're wrong, here.  All your C programs are a stand in for
turing machines.  A turing machine is either running or halted.  There is
no third state "aborted".
>
Until you take the conventional ideas of
(a) UTM
(b) TM Description
(c) Decider
and combine them together to become a simulating partial halt decider.
>
You also need the conventional ideas of halting and halt decider.
The latter is largely a combination of the conventional ideas of
decider and halting but also involves the conventional of
prediction, so you need that, too.
>
Although the conventional idea of testing is not relevant to the construction of a simulating partial halt decider it is helpful to presentation of the
result, especially if your target audience contains software engineers. If your target audience is mainly mathematicians the convnetional idea of proofs is more useful because in that case most of your presentation must be proofs.
>
My ideas must be anchored in fully specified running software
otherwise the false assumptions made by computer science people
remain hidden.
 There is no "must" there. You may present your ideas whichever way you
think is the best for your purposes.
 
Even when I make my ideas 100% concrete people still deny
the verified facts.When I make them less than 100% concrete
it is not as specific as verified facts.

One good way to avoid false assumptions is to clearly state what is
assumed instead. Sometimes it may be necessary to clearly state what
is not assumed.
 
Even when I slap them in the face with proven facts they deny
these proven facts on the basis of their indoctrination.
 Facts are never proven. They are observed.
 
You didn't even bother to look at how HHH examines the
execution trace of Infinite_Recursion() to determine that Infinite_Recursion() specifies non-halting behavior.
Because of this you cannot see that the execution trace
of DDD correctly emulated by DDD is essentially this same
trace and thus also specifies non-halting behavior.
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
}
_Infinite_Recursion()
[0000215a] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
[0000215b] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000215d] e8f8ffffff call 0000215a ; 3rd line
[00002162] 5d         pop ebp
[00002163] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0010) [00002163]
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113934
[0000215a][00113924][00113928] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
[0000215b][00113924][00113928] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000215d][00113920][00002162] e8f8ffffff call 0000215a ; 3rd line
[0000215a][0011391c][00113924] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
[0000215b][0011391c][00113924] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000215d][00113918][00002162] e8f8ffffff call 0000215a ; 3rd line
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
=====
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}
_DDD()
[00002177] 55               push ebp      ; 1st line
[00002178] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000217a] 6877210000       push 00002177 ; push DDD
[0000217f] e853f4ffff       call 000015d7 ; call HHH
[00002184] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002187] 5d               pop ebp
[00002188] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002188]
// executed HHH emulates 1st instance of DDD
New slave_stack at:10388d
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113895
[00002177][00113885][00113889] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
[00002178][00113885][00113889] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000217a][00113881][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
[0000217f][0011387d][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
// emulated HHH emulates 2nd instance of DDD
New slave_stack at:14e2b5
[00002177][0015e2ad][0015e2b1] 55         push ebp      ; 1st line
[00002178][0015e2ad][0015e2b1] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; 2nd line
[0000217a][0015e2a9][00002177] 6877210000 push 00002177 ; push DDD
[0000217f][0015e2a5][00002184] e853f4ffff call 000015d7 ; call HHH
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
26 Jul 24 * This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace112olcott
26 Jul 24 +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace3joes
26 Jul 24 i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2Mike Terry
26 Jul 24 i `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1olcott
26 Jul 24 +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace50Mike Terry
26 Jul 24 i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace49olcott
27 Jul 24 i +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4Mikko
27 Jul 24 i i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace3olcott
27 Jul 24 i i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i i `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
27 Jul 24 i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace6Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace5olcott
27 Jul 24 i i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i i +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2joes
27 Jul 24 i i i`- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1olcott
28 Jul 24 i i `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
27 Jul 24 i `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace37Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace36olcott
27 Jul 24 i   +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace31Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i   i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace30olcott
28 Jul 24 i   i +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace5Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i   i i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4olcott
28 Jul 24 i   i i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
28 Jul 24 i   i i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i   i i `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1joes
28 Jul 24 i   i `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace24Mikko
29 Jul 24 i   i  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace23olcott
29 Jul 24 i   i   +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
30 Jul 24 i   i   +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
30 Jul 24 i   i   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace20Mikko
31 Jul 24 i   i    `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace19olcott
31 Jul 24 i   i     +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
31 Jul 24 i   i     `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace17Mikko
31 Jul 24 i   i      +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace14olcott
1 Aug 24 i   i      i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace13Mikko
1 Aug 24 i   i      i `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace12olcott
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace10Fred. Zwarts
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace9olcott
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace7joes
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace6olcott
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i   +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace3Fred. Zwarts
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i   i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2olcott
2 Aug 24 i   i      i  i   i `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2joes
1 Aug 24 i   i      i  i    `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1olcott
2 Aug 24 i   i      i  `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Mikko
31 Jul 24 i   i      `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2olcott
1 Aug 24 i   i       `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Mikko
28 Jul 24 i   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4Mikko
29 Jul 24 i    `* HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) derive same non-halting execution trace3olcott
29 Jul 24 i     +- Re: HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) derive same non-halting execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
30 Jul 24 i     `- Re: HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) derive same non-halting execution trace1Mikko
27 Jul 24 +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
27 Jul 24 +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace56Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace55olcott
27 Jul 24 i `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace54Fred. Zwarts
27 Jul 24 i  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace53olcott
27 Jul 24 i   +* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace50Alan Mackenzie
27 Jul 24 i   i+* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace17olcott
27 Jul 24 i   ii+* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace9Alan Mackenzie
27 Jul 24 i   iii`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace8olcott
27 Jul 24 i   iii `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace7Alan Mackenzie
27 Jul 24 i   iii  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace6olcott
27 Jul 24 i   iii   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace5Alan Mackenzie
28 Jul 24 i   iii    `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4olcott
28 Jul 24 i   iii     `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace3Alan Mackenzie
28 Jul 24 i   iii      `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2olcott
28 Jul 24 i   iii       `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
28 Jul 24 i   ii`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace7Mikko
29 Jul 24 i   ii `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace6olcott
29 Jul 24 i   ii  +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
29 Jul 24 i   ii  `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4Mikko
29 Jul 24 i   ii   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace3olcott
29 Jul 24 i   ii    +- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Fred. Zwarts
30 Jul 24 i   ii    `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Mikko
28 Jul 24 i   i+* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace27Mike Terry
28 Jul 24 i   ii+- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
28 Jul 24 i   ii+* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace21olcott
28 Jul 24 i   iii+- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Richard Damon
28 Jul 24 i   iii`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace19Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i   iii `* HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)18olcott
28 Jul 24 i   iii  +- Re: HHH(DDD) does not see the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)1Richard Damon
28 Jul 24 i   iii  `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)16Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i   iii   `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)15olcott
28 Jul 24 i   iii    +- Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion) unless it can abort.1Richard Damon
29 Jul 24 i   iii    `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)13Fred. Zwarts
29 Jul 24 i   iii     `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)12olcott
29 Jul 24 i   iii      `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)11Fred. Zwarts
30 Jul 24 i   iii       `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)10Mike Terry
30 Jul 24 i   iii        `* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)9olcott
30 Jul 24 i   iii         +- Re: HHH(DDD) does not see the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion) OLCOTTS ERROR1Richard Damon
30 Jul 24 i   iii         +* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)6joes
31 Jul 24 i   iii         i`* Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)5Mike Terry
31 Jul 24 i   iii         i `* Linz proof is essentially isomorphic4olcott
31 Jul 24 i   iii         i  `* Re: Linz proof is essentially isomorphic3Richard Damon
31 Jul 24 i   iii         i   `* Re: Linz proof is essentially isomorphic2olcott
31 Jul 24 i   iii         i    `- Re: Linz proof is essentially isomorphic1Richard Damon
30 Jul 24 i   iii         `- Re: HHH(DDD) sees the exact same behavior pattern as HHH(Infinite_Recursion)1Fred. Zwarts
28 Jul 24 i   ii`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace4Alan Mackenzie
28 Jul 24 i   i`* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace5Mikko
27 Jul 24 i   `* Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace2Fred. Zwarts
3 Aug 24 `- Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal