Sujet : Re: Defining a correct simulating halt decider
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 07. Sep 2024, 14:56:02
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vbhm1i$1c7u5$11@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 9/7/2024 3:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-06 11:42:48 +0000, olcott said:
On 9/6/2024 6:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-05 13:24:20 +0000, olcott said:
>
On 9/5/2024 2:34 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-03 13:00:50 +0000, olcott said:
>
On 9/3/2024 5:25 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-02 16:38:03 +0000, olcott said:
>
A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes
the mapping from its finite string input to the
behavior that this finite string specifies.
>
A halt decider needn't compute the full behaviour, only whether
that behaviour is finite or infinite.
>
>
void DDD()
{
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
>
Nice to see that you don't disagree with what said.
Unvortunately I can't agree with what you say.
HHH terminates,
>
os DDD obviously terminates, too. No valid
>
DDD emulated by HHH never reaches it final halt state.
>
If that iis true it means that HHH called by DDD does not return
and therefore is not a ceicder.
>
>
The directly executed HHH is a decider.
If the called HHH behaves differently from the direcly executed HHH
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.
I SHOW THE ACTUAL EXECUTION TRACE AND EVERYONE DISAGREES WITH IT.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer