Re: Can you see that D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation?

On 5/24/2024 6:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/23/24 11:59 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/23/2024 10:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/23/24 11:06 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/23/2024 9:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/23/24 10:22 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/23/2024 8:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/23/24 1:04 PM, olcott wrote:

typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
01       int D(ptr p)
02       {
03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
04         if (Halt_Status)
05           HERE: goto HERE;
06         return Halt_Status;
07       }
08
09       int main()
10       {
11         H(D,D);
12         return 0;
13       }
>
The above template refers to an infinite set of H/D pairs where D is
correctly simulated by pure function H. This was done because many
reviewers used the shell game ploy to endlessly switch which H/D pair
was being referred to.
>
*Correct Simulation Defined*
    This is provided because every reviewer had a different notion of
    correct simulation that diverges from this notion.
>
    A simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates at least one
    of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the x86
    instructions of D.
>
    This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in
    the order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D)
    in recursive simulation.
>
*Execution Trace*
    Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D); H(D,D) simulates lines 01, 02, and 03
    of D. This invokes H(D,D) again to repeat the process in endless
    recursive simulation.
>

>
Questions:
>
By your definiton of "Correct Simulation", you do realize that you have broken connection between the simulaiton not completing and the program described by the input not halting?
>

>
In other words you are requiring that the x86 instructions of D
(and possibly H) be simulated incorrectly and/or in the wrong order.

>
No, they must be simulated COMPLETELY.
>

>
(a) *Clearly you are terrible at reading a spec*
(b) *non terminating computations cannot be simulated completely*

>
Not by your definition,
>
D(D) proves you wrong, since it HALTS when run, it terminates.

*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*

 The FUNCTION D halts

The strawman deception away form the subject of the subject
line will not be tolerated. I let Ben Bacarisse get away with
that for fifteen years.
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
*D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly halt*
Not even after a quadrillion steps of correct simulation.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer