Re: Defining a correct simulating halt decider

Op 05.sep.2024 om 16:09 schreef olcott:

On 9/5/2024 5:24 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 04.sep.2024 om 15:06 schreef olcott:

On 9/4/2024 4:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 03.sep.2024 om 22:25 schreef olcott:

On 9/3/2024 2:01 PM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 03 Sep 2024 13:40:08 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/3/2024 9:42 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 02 Sep 2024 16:06:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 9/2/2024 12:52 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 02.sep.2024 om 18:38 schreef olcott:

A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from
its finite string input to the behavior that this finite string
specifies.
If the finite string machine string machine description specifies
that it cannot possibly reach its own final halt state then this
machine description specifies non-halting behavior.

Which DDD does not.

DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its final halt state no matter
what HHH does.

But DDD halts, so it „specifies halting behaviour”.
HHH can’t simulate itself.
>

>
HHH does simulate itself simulating DDD
why do you insist on lying about this?
>
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c

HHH *tries* to simulate itself, but it fails to reach the end of its simulation of the halting program.

>
The source code proves otherwise that you are not bright
enough to understand this code is no rebuttal at all.
>

Olcott's only rebuttal is a ad hominem attacks.
No evidence for another incorrect claim.
Even olcott agreed that HHH cannot reach the end of DDD and now he contradicts himself.

   DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.
It looks like I have to repeat this 10,000 times before
anyone ever notices that I said it at least once.

HHH cannot possible simulate itself correctly up  to the end.
Mow many times more do I have to repeat it?
HHH fails to reach the end of the simulation!

 _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]
 Show the details of how DDD emulated by HHH
reaches its own machine address 0000217f.
 00002172, 00002173, 00002175, 0000217a calls HHH(DDD)
then
00002172, 00002173, 00002175, 0000217a calls HHH(DDD)...
 

And then the simulation stop prematurely. Therefore, it misses the fact that in the third cycle the first simulated HHH would have completed its second cycle, see the 'special condition',abort and return to DDD 0000217f, 00002182, 00002183 and halt.
That HHH misses this behaviour does not change the fact that this is the behaviour coded in the program. It proves that HHH is incorrect.