Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally?
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 28. Apr 2024, 14:52:27
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v0lkas$12q0o$3@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 4/28/2024 8:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 4/28/24 8:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 4/28/2024 3:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-04-28 00:17:48 +0000, olcott said:
>
Can D simulated by H terminate normally?
>
One should not that "D simulated by H" is not the same as
"simulation of D by H". The message below seems to be more
about the latter than the former. In any case, it is more
about the properties of H than about the properties of D.
>
>
D specifies what is essentially infinite recursion to H.
Several people agreed that D simulated by H cannot possibly
reach past its own line 03 no matter what H does.
 Nope, it is only that if H fails to be a decider.
 
*We don't make this leap of logic. I never used the term decider*
*We don't make this leap of logic. I never used the term decider*
*We don't make this leap of logic. I never used the term decider*
*We don't make this leap of logic. I never used the term decider*
We are only concerned with the behavior of a pair of C functions.
Unless I require that reviewers proceed through every slight nuance
of details of my reasoning they simply ignore my words and leap to
the conclusion that I must be wrong.
*It will be increasingly more clear that your rebuttals are baseless*
*It will be increasingly more clear that your rebuttals are baseless*
*It will be increasingly more clear that your rebuttals are baseless*

Since you claim H to be a decider, D can not have infinite recursion, because H must return in finite time.
 Yes, we get two different, and contradictory, sets of results depending on which facts we look at. The cause of this is the principle of explosion, that somewhere in our setup we have a false premise, and that turns out to be that there can exist an H that can correctly determine the halting status of its input, or in particular, the input built by this formula.
 
>
The x86utm operating system based on an open source x86 emulator.
This system enables one C function to execute another C function
in debug step mode. When H simulates D it creates a separate process
context for D with its own memory, stack and virtual registers. H
is able to simulate D simulating itself, thus the only limit to
recursive simulations is RAM.
>
// The following is written in C
//
01 typedef int (*ptr)(); // pointer to int function
02 int H(ptr x, ptr y)    // uses x86 emulator to simulate its input
03
04 int D(ptr x)
05 {
06   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
07   if (Halt_Status)
08     HERE: goto HERE;
09   return Halt_Status;
10 }
11
12 void main()
13 {
14   D(D);
15 }
>
Execution Trace
Line 14: main() invokes D(D)
>
keeps repeating (unless aborted)
Line 06: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>
Simulation invariant
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach its own line 09.
>
Is it dead obvious to everyone here when examining the execution
trace of lines 14 and 06 above that D correctly simulated by H cannot
possibly terminate normally by reaching its own line 09?
>
>
>
 
--
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
22 Dec 24 o 

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal