Re: No one can correctly refute that simulating abort decider A(D,D) is correct

On 3/27/24 4:10 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/27/2024 2:57 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 27.mrt.2024 om 20:04 schreef olcott:

01 void B(ptr x) // ptr is pointer to void function
02 {
03   A(x, x);
04   return;
05 }
06
07 void main()
08 {
09   A(B,B);
10 }
>
*Execution Trace*
Line 09: main() invokes A(B,B);
>
*keeps repeating* (unless aborted)

That is a premature conclusion when A is not specified.

 *simulating abort decider* A(D,D)
*simulating abort decider* A(D,D)
*simulating abort decider* A(D,D)
*simulating abort decider* A(D,D)

Which just shows your ignorance as that doesn't define what A actually is, or needs to do.
You are just demonstrating that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

It holds if A does not halt. If A returns, then B will halt (unless aborted).

 If you honestly don't see that no A can possible return to
any simulated B then you lied about your programming skill.
Otherwise you can see this and are lying about it.

It may not be able to simulate a B to the point of seeing an A return to it, but that doesn't mean that the actual behavior of B doesn't have that happen.
REALITY is the actual behavior of B.
"FANTASY" is what A sees in its simulation and then extrapolating without reason.
REALITY is what matters, not the lies of FANTASY.

 

So, the problem of not halting is not in B but in the unspecified A. If A halts, B will halt. If A does not halt, B will not halt.
Even a beginner will see it.
>

Line 03: simulated B(B) invokes simulated A(B,B) that simulates B(B)

but not completely, because A aborts the simulation and halts, which makes that B halts too (unless aborted).
>

*Simulation invariant*
B correctly simulated by A cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.

>
Except if A aborts and halts, because then also B halts (unless aborted).
>

 For every A that simulates B whether any A ever aborts this
simulation or not the simulated B cannot possibly reach its
own line 04 and halt.

But the ACTUAL B does, which is what matters.

 You either are lying about this or
lying about your programming skill or
are lying about which B you are referring to.

No, you are lying abort how your idea have ANY connection to actual reality.

 

>
The whole class of every A(B,B) that simulates its input
is divided into two sub-classes:
(a) A(B,B) that DOES NOT abort its simulation is incorrect
     (ABOUT THIS ABORT DECISION)
     because it would never halt and all deciders must always halt.
>
(b) A(B,N) that DOES abort its simulation is correct
     (ABOUT THIS ABORT DECISION)
     because it would halt and all deciders must always halt.

>
It would be correct if A would not halt. Only in that case B would not halt and an abort is needed. But not halting and aborting is not possible for the same A, so A is wrong, because it aborts prematurely.
>
>
>