Re: D(D) simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03

On 5/3/24 6:42 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/3/2024 8:40 AM, olcott wrote:

00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12 }
>
We are examining the behavior of D(D) for every possible H/D pair
where 1 to N steps of D(D) are simulated by H.
>
*Execution Trace*
Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>
*keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
Line 01
Line 02
Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>
*Simulation invariant*
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>
(a) It is a verified fact that for every possible H/D pair where
1 to N steps of D(D) are simulated by H that this simulated D(D)
cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.

 Since everyone is denying these facts on the basis that no one
here has a clue about what execution traces are and how they work
it makes no sense to go to the next step.

(a) has been proven incorrect.
If you won't make the effort to try to refute that proof, you are just admitting that you are not interested in an honest dialog.
Of course people won't accept a step that is known to be incorrect.
If you won't handle the objections, YOU are the one holding up your progress.

 

>
(b) Rebuttals must show a counter example where 1 to N steps
of D(D) are simulated by H and the simulated D(D) reaches past
its own line 03.

Which it was.

>
*Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>
*Fully operational code implemented in the x86utm operating system*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
>
>
>