XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic
From: polcott333@gmail.com
On 6/30/2024 2:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/30/24 10:07 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/30/2024 7:34 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/29/24 10:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/29/2024 6:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/29/24 6:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 4:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/29/24 4:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 3:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/24 4:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 3:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/24 3:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 2:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/24 2:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 1:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/29/24 2:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
>>>>>>>>>>>> until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
>>>>>>>>>>>> stop running unless aborted then
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>>>>>>>> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But that only applies if H determines a CORRECT SIMULATION
>>>>>>>>>>> per HIS definition does not halt
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>> That means the DIRECT EXECUTION of the program represented by
>>>>>>>>>>> the input does not halt, since that is the DEFINITION of the
>>>>>>>>>>> results of a correct simuation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That also requires that the simulation does not stop until it
>>>>>>>>>>> reaches a final state. You H neither does that nor correctly
>>>>>>>>>>> determines that (since it does halt) thus you can never use
>>>>>>>>>>> the second paragraph to be allowed to abort, even though you
>>>>>>>>>>> do anyway, which is why you get the wrong answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *N steps of correct simulation are specified*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H correctly simulates its input D until H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H correctly simulates its input D until H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H correctly simulates its input D until H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H correctly simulates its input D until H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which does not determine the ACTUAL behavor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55 push ebp ;
housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ;
housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d pop ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3 ret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you already know that it does prove that DDD correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulated by HHH would never stop running unless aborted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or out-of-memory error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *proves that you are trying to get away with a bald-faced
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lie*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I really hope that you repent before it is too late.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, just shows your stupidity, as the above code has NO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> defined behavior as it accesses code that is not defined by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Its behavior is completely defined by*
>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) The finite string x86 machine code that includes
>>>>>>>>>>>> the recursive emulation call from DDD to HHH(DDD).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But by the semantics of the x86 langugage, the call to HHH
>>>>>>>>>>> does NOT do a "recursive simulation" since that is not a term
>>>>>>>>>>> in that language.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The Call to HHH just cause the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) The semantics of the x86 language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (c) That HHH is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
>>>>>>>>>>>> N steps of DDD.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Which isn't an ACTUALY correct emulation, but only a PARTIAL
>>>>>>>>>>> correct emulation (since correct emulation implies EVERY
>>>>>>>>>>> instruction but a terminal one is followed by the next
>>>>>>>>>>> instruction).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The key fact is that PARTIAL emulation doesn't reveal the
>>>>>>>>>>> future of the behavior past the point of the emulation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In other words you are trying to get away with claiming
>>>>>>>>>> that professor Sipser made a stupid mistake:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> H correctly simulates its input D until H correctly determines
>>>>>>>>>> that its simulated D would never stop running unless aborted
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nope, he just laid a trap that you fell into.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He could not have possibly laid any trap you dumb bunny.
>>>>>>>> All of the words were my own verbatim words. It took me
>>>>>>>> two years to compose those exact words.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, and he could have seen the errors in your apparent
>>>>>>> misunderstanding of the words and accepted them, knowing that
>>>>>>> they were actually meaningless.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The ONLY simulation that Professor Sipser accepts as correct,
>>>>>>>>> is one that shows EXACTLY the behavior of the machine being
>>>>>>>>> simulated.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So you are stupid enough to believe that professor Sipser
>>>>>>>> is stupid enough to to try and get away with disagreeing
>>>>>>>> with the semantics of the x86 language?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question said NOTHING of the x86 language, so it doesn't matter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Liar Liar pants on fire !!!
>>>>>> Liar Liar pants on fire !!!
>>>>>> Liar Liar pants on fire !!!
>>>>>> Liar Liar pants on fire !!!
>>>>>> Liar Liar pants on fire !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> But the question to Professor Sipser was, as you quoted:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
>>>>> until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
>>>>> stop running unless aborted then
>>>>>
>>>>> H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
