Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 9/8/2024 9:56 AM, Mikko wrote:Your question is ill-posed unless one believes a lie.On 2024-09-07 13:56:02 +0000, olcott said:The x86 execution trace is encoded in the x86 language.
On 9/7/2024 3:27 AM, Mikko wrote:There are no encoding rules in the actual execution trace.On 2024-09-06 11:42:48 +0000, olcott said:I SHOW THE ACTUAL EXECUTION TRACE AND EVERYONE DISAGREES WITH IT.
On 9/6/2024 6:19 AM, Mikko wrote:If the called HHH behaves differently from the direcly executed HHHOn 2024-09-05 13:24:20 +0000, olcott said:The directly executed HHH is a decider.
On 9/5/2024 2:34 AM, Mikko wrote:If that iis true it means that HHH called by DDD does not returnOn 2024-09-03 13:00:50 +0000, olcott said:
On 9/3/2024 5:25 AM, Mikko wrote:Nice to see that you don't disagree with what said.On 2024-09-02 16:38:03 +0000, olcott said:void DDD()
A halt decider is a Turing machine that computesA halt decider needn't compute the full behaviour, only whether
the mapping from its finite string input to the
behavior that this finite string specifies.
that behaviour is finite or infinite.
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
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
Hence HHH(DDD)==0 is correct
Unvortunately I can't agree with what you say.
HHH terminates,os DDD obviously terminates, too. No validDDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.
and therefore is not a ceicder.
then the DDD is not relevant to classic proofs of the impossibility
of a halting decider.
If you can't show encoding rules that permit the encoidng of the
behaviour of the directly executed DDD to HHH then HHH is not a
halting decider.
Why do you insist on lying about this?
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.