Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.


devel / comp.theory / Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

SubjectAuthor
* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input toolcott
+- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
+* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
|`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |   `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |    `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |     +- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |     `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |      `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |   `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |    `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |     `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |      `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |       `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |        `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |         `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |          `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |           `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |            `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |             `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |              `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |               `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                 `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                   `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?Richard Damon
| | |       |                    `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                     `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                      `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                       `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                        `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                         |+* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         ||`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?Richard Damon
| | |       |                         || `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         ||  `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                         |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputMalcolm McLean
| | |       |                         | +- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputMalcolm McLean
| | |       |                         |  +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         |  |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         |  |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |   `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         |  |    `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |     `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         |  |      `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |       `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         |  |        `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |         `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         |  |          `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |           `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                         |  |            `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |             `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         |  |              `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputAndré G. Isaak
| | |       |                         |  |               `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         |  |                `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                         |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputMalcolm McLean
| | |       |                         |   `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |       |                         `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                          +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       |                          |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                          | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H? [ key axolcott
| | |       |                          |  `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |       |                          `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |       |                           `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |       `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |        `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |         `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |          +* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |          |`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputwij
| | |          | +- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |          | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputdklei...@gmail.com
| | |          |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |          |   `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?Richard Damon
| | |          |    `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |          |     `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |          |      `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| | |          |       `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |          `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputChris M. Thomasson
| | |           `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| | |            `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputChris M. Thomasson
| | |             `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |              `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputChris M. Thomasson
| | |               `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |                `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputChris M. Thomasson
| | |                 `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?olcott
| | |                  `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?Ben Bacarisse
| | `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| |  `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputolcott
| |   `- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
| `* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
+- How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the inputRichard Damon
`* How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?Ben Bacarisse

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<7WYSI.9$iw5.3@fx02.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19893&group=comp.theory#19893

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx02.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87eeavycxg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <sf9c3k$7un$1@dont-email.me>
<wpidnVhzXtFXtYT8nZ2dnUU78YHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
<D6WdnQ0Hy92V0YT8nZ2dnUU7-Q3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87im06wiup.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<DJGdncQOXNbfHYT8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874kbqw62q.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<W7udnRlZduvgdof8nZ2dnUU7-IPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87h7fpuf5v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<AsSdnUXVrYJ5nYb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yw4v08g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oKidneawW_dWu4H8nZ2dnUU7-emdnZ2d@giganews.com> <8735r7u3ab.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ufKdnZfZ0sUP3YH8nZ2dnUU7-SXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wnojsjqd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ReKdnb2pB4SVyoH8nZ2dnUU7-SvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ReKdnb2pB4SVyoH8nZ2dnUU7-SvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <7WYSI.9$iw5.3@fx02.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:57:38 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5261
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 00:57 UTC

On 8/17/21 8:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 7:02 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 8/17/2021 5:14 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>
>>>> The facts come from you.  They are not a matter of opinion.  P(P)
>>>> halts.
>>>> H(P,P) == 0.
>> ...
>>>> You are happy with that answer, but I can specify a function you can't
>>>> write: B(M, I) such that B(M, I) is non zero if and only if M(I) halts.
>>>> You don't get to choose what the "correct" answer is, so your only
>>>> option if to ignore the challenge.
>>>
>>> At this point I expect and require that those seeking an actual honest
>>> dialogue use the basis that I provided to verify that H does decide
>>> the halt status of its inputs correctly. Everyone else is written off
>>> as dishonest.
>>
>> That's up to you.  I can't stop you wasting time on a function no one
>> cares about, but you know you can't write the function I specified, so
>> you are back where you started 17 years ago.  There are still
>> undecidable sets.
>>
>
> The function does meet the spec and you either refuse to confirm this or
> are technically unqualified to evaluate the x86 code proof of this. I
> was very surprised how little you understood about operating system
> context switching.
>

The Machine the input represents Halts.

The Decider says that the machine the input represents will not Halt.

The Decider is thus WRONG.

> I certainly won't make any denigrating remarks about this. I simply over
> estimated your ability, my mistake. Your technical ability regarding the
> theory of computation may be still quite high.
>
> Let's get back to something that you seem to know well:
>
> Ĥ.q0 wM ⊢* Ĥ.qx wM wM ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
> if M applied to wM halts, and
>
> Ĥ.q0 wM ⊢* Ĥ.qx wM wM ⊢* Ĥ.qn
> if M applied to wM does not halt
>
> Can you understand that Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ would never stop running if the
> machine at Ĥ.qx was a UTM? (Your lack of understanding of this would not
> be my mistake).

But the machine at H^.qx isn't a UTM, so that doesn't matter. FAIL.

All you are showing is that Ha can correctly predict that Hn^(<Hn^>) is
non-halting, but Ha needs to get Ha(<Ha^>,<Ha^>) to match the behavior
of Ha^(<Ha^>(

>
>> What's more, the computation that will defeat any attempt you make at
>> meeting this challenge is the very one you thought you'd got round.
>>
>
> I did get around this H(P,P) does correctly decide that its input never
> halts thus perfectly meeting the requirements of the actual halting
> problem. Also the embedded halt decider at Ĥ.qx applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ does
> correctly decide that its input never halts.
>

UNSOUND LOGIC, DISPROVEN

> I only have to resolve the paradox and there will be nothing that even
> seems to show that my proof is incorrect.
>
> That I was able to correctly resolve the Liar Paradox having been an
> open logic issue for 2000 years sufficiently proves that I can resolve
> paradoxes. Russell's paradox suffered the same fate.

FAIL.

>
>>>>>>    you can't write a function B such that B(M, I)
>>>>>> is true, if and only if, M(I) halts.  Your H won't do because you
>>>>>> assure
>>>>>> us that P(P) halts and H(P, P) is false.
>>>>>> You can crow about H all you like, and you can stamp your feet and
>>>>>> *insist* that H(P,P) == 0 is correct, but there are a still
>>>>>> uncomputable
>>>>>> functions.  I just specified one -- B above.
>>>>>> If you want to take up this challenge, I can specify it more
>>>>>> precisely,
>>>>>> but I advise you to ignore it.
>>>>
>>>> As expected.
>>
>
>

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19894&group=comp.theory#19894

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:02:42 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com> <v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com> <BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com> <KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad> <YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad> <BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad> <N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad> <a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad> <2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad> <HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:02:40 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 140
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-F8dC6KLTMIKzmnm25Kq0S/TeLC6lJ3N5l+cvrDv4D9XQLCx3ZuFXJvo8TTG0QgOCn0Qk0pSFcVh7feR!Ak3I9uVbDRlNbuJWPy9GrEie7Vhe0FYM6Dp2z7OQzz/4L8BEAxmIQugUMuf8eZyIHnAbhJXTNf+K!g5M=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 8155
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:02 UTC

On 8/17/2021 7:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 6:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 11:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 5:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 9:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please read the definitions again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A Pure simulator NEVER aborts its simulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like I said you probably have to reread what I say a few hundred
>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> times before you will understand it. I can no longer tolerate people
>>>>>>>> that continually glace at a few words before forming their rebuttal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, so you just admit that you aren't using the real definition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you reread it a few hundred more times you will see that I did not
>>>>>> use the term incorrectly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then please provide a reliable source that shows the term being used in
>>>>> that manner.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is self-evident that the term is being used correctly.
>>>
>>> Maybe to someone who is pathologically wrong and admits to not having
>>> studied the theory.
>>>
>>> It is WRONG, thoroughly W-R-O-N-G
>>>
>>>
>>> WW      WW  RRRRRRRR    OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>> WW      WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NNNN    NN  GG      GG
>>> WW  WW  WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG
>>> WW  WW  WW  RRRRRRRR    OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG  GGGGGG
>>> WW  WW  WW  RR  RR      OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG      GG
>>> WW  WW  WW  RR    RR    OO      OO  NN    NNNN  GG      GG
>>> WWWWWWWWWW  RR      RR  OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>
>>> Maybe you should look at what I said, and try to find anyone else (with
>>> a positive reputation) that agrees with you.
>>>
>>> Note, the operative feature that a pure simulator has is that it
>>> produces the exact same result as the machine it is simulating would.
>>> Your claimed pure simulator doesn't, as you claim that its input is
>>> non-halting but the simulator is halting.
>>>
>>> At BEST you have a claim of some 'new use' of the term but then you need
>>> to actually prove that your transformation is valid for this sort of
>>> machine.
>>>
>>> Please TRY to find someone who shows ANY evidence that it is valid to
>>> replace the simulation of this sort of machine you are calling a 'pure
>>> simulator' (one that eventually abort its simulation) with a simulation
>>> of the machine it is simulation.
>>>
>>> THAT is where you fully hit the wall of UNSOUND logic.
>>>
>>> Your 'logic' is totally unsound, as is your instance on it. It as truly
>>> reached the point where it has just devolved into a blatant lie.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your evaluation that the term is not being used correctly is entirely
>>>> based on the fact that you are simply skipping over and ignoring some of
>>>> the words that I said. If you are very careful to make sure that you
>>>> read and understand every single word then you will see that I am using
>>>> the term "simulation" correctly.
>>>
>>> WRONG. I go by the DEFINITION of the word. Note, it isn't 'simulator'
>>> that I disagree with. Your machine is definitely a partial simulator. It
>>> just isn't a 'Pure' simulator that simulates to the 'end' of the machine
>>> it is simulating, which is what is needed to use the transformation you
>>> want to use.
>>>
>>> You machine is most definitely a PARTIAL Simulator, for which you have
>>> no grounds to use that transformation.
>>>
>>> You just are so ignorant of the field, that you don't understand the
>>> difference, and so ignorant of the rules of logic to realize that you
>>> really do need to try to prove your assertions.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> By making sure to erase the words that I said it would seem to be easier
>>>> to get away with intentional misinterpretation.
>>>
>>> Why do I need to erase them (like you seem to like to). It is CLEAR to
>>> anyone with a sane mind how wrong your logic is, so I feel no need to
>>> hide the words I am refuting.
>>>
>>> YOU are the one who reveal your heart by the way you dishonestly trim
>>> messages, removing important content that you just don't want to deal
>>> with.
>>>
>>> It is obvious to everyone how badly you are handling this. YOU are the
>>> one stuck in unsound logic due to an unsound mindset.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Intentional misinterpretation is a form of lying. The fact that you keep
>>>> erasing these words seems to be evidence that you are lying:
>>>
>>> Yes, YOU seem to INTENTIONALLY misuse words, which as you say is LYING.
>>>
>>> I hope you are prepared to meet your maker with this sin deeply in your
>>> heart.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing each
>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>
>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>
>
> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its simulation.
>

It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19895&group=comp.theory#19895

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!ux6ld97kLXxG8kVFFLnoWg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: chris.m....@gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 18:11:00 -0700
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<cdd186c7-7d3a-45f6-b4e8-3bfe85ef6075n@googlegroups.com>
<vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com>
<kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com>
<v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com>
<eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com>
<sfhg3i$1l3g$1@gioia.aioe.org> <xPYSI.12$Oz2.10@fx47.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="53772"; posting-host="ux6ld97kLXxG8kVFFLnoWg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Chris M. Thomasson - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:11 UTC

On 8/17/2021 5:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 7:18 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>
>>
>> Can he emulate lock cmpxchg?
>
> It is very possible to emulate ANY instruction. Some require a bit more
> care than others.
>
> Since is emulator is really only emulating a single thread of execution,
> so things like locks are really not that important.
>

Okay, well does he have cmpxchg, xadd, xchg, completed? Just wondering.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<t_6dnaRzH5_awoH8nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19896&group=comp.theory#19896

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!4.us.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr3.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:15:51 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <cdd186c7-7d3a-45f6-b4e8-3bfe85ef6075n@googlegroups.com> <vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com> <kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com> <v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com> <BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com> <KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com> <eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com> <sfhg3i$1l3g$1@gioia.aioe.org> <xPYSI.12$Oz2.10@fx47.iad> <sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:15:50 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <t_6dnaRzH5_awoH8nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 23
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-bghVqVBnTrVv1GmfgDG1HYivHQQC1Aaqe2MVYkN1+h6+kB41rWNbBuo+08lN+cT6YdsANezUhAZcyhY!3MAuG9j67NxenCCA7EJ4wREMIIo5mmCx6aFifg70egXaMj6DdNidWEaU9d5qTh0dAYQGv72Q5401!cDo=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2819
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:15 UTC

On 8/17/2021 8:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 5:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 7:18 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Can he emulate lock cmpxchg?
>>
>> It is very possible to emulate ANY instruction. Some require a bit more
>> care than others.
>>
>> Since is emulator is really only emulating a single thread of execution,
>> so things like locks are really not that important.
>>
>
> Okay, well does he have cmpxchg, xadd, xchg, completed? Just wondering.

https://github.com/wfeldt/libx86emu

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19897&group=comp.theory#19897

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx48.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 175
Message-ID: <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:17:24 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 9009
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:17 UTC

On 8/17/21 9:02 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 7:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 6:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 11:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 5:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 9:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please read the definitions again.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A Pure simulator NEVER aborts its simulation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like I said you probably have to reread what I say a few hundred
>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>> times before you will understand it. I can no longer tolerate
>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>> that continually glace at a few words before forming their
>>>>>>>>> rebuttal.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, so you just admit that you aren't using the real definition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you reread it a few hundred more times you will see that I did
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> use the term incorrectly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then please provide a reliable source that shows the term being
>>>>>> used in
>>>>>> that manner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is self-evident that the term is being used correctly.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe to someone who is pathologically wrong and admits to not having
>>>> studied the theory.
>>>>
>>>> It is WRONG, thoroughly W-R-O-N-G
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WW      WW  RRRRRRRR    OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>> WW      WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NNNN    NN  GG      GG
>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG
>>>> WW  WW  WW  RRRRRRRR    OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG  GGGGGG
>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR  RR      OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG      GG
>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR    RR    OO      OO  NN    NNNN  GG      GG
>>>> WWWWWWWWWW  RR      RR  OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should look at what I said, and try to find anyone else (with
>>>> a positive reputation) that agrees with you.
>>>>
>>>> Note, the operative feature that a pure simulator has is that it
>>>> produces the exact same result as the machine it is simulating would.
>>>> Your claimed pure simulator doesn't, as you claim that its input is
>>>> non-halting but the simulator is halting.
>>>>
>>>> At BEST you have a claim of some 'new use' of the term but then you
>>>> need
>>>> to actually prove that your transformation is valid for this sort of
>>>> machine.
>>>>
>>>> Please TRY to find someone who shows ANY evidence that it is valid to
>>>> replace the simulation of this sort of machine you are calling a 'pure
>>>> simulator' (one that eventually abort its simulation) with a simulation
>>>> of the machine it is simulation.
>>>>
>>>> THAT is where you fully hit the wall of UNSOUND logic.
>>>>
>>>> Your 'logic' is totally unsound, as is your instance on it. It as truly
>>>> reached the point where it has just devolved into a blatant lie.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your evaluation that the term is not being used correctly is entirely
>>>>> based on the fact that you are simply skipping over and ignoring
>>>>> some of
>>>>> the words that I said. If you are very careful to make sure that you
>>>>> read and understand every single word then you will see that I am
>>>>> using
>>>>> the term "simulation" correctly.
>>>>
>>>> WRONG. I go by the DEFINITION of the word. Note, it isn't 'simulator'
>>>> that I disagree with. Your machine is definitely a partial
>>>> simulator. It
>>>> just isn't a 'Pure' simulator that simulates to the 'end' of the
>>>> machine
>>>> it is simulating, which is what is needed to use the transformation you
>>>> want to use.
>>>>
>>>> You machine is most definitely a PARTIAL Simulator, for which you have
>>>> no grounds to use that transformation.
>>>>
>>>> You just are so ignorant of the field, that you don't understand the
>>>> difference, and so ignorant of the rules of logic to realize that you
>>>> really do need to try to prove your assertions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By making sure to erase the words that I said it would seem to be
>>>>> easier
>>>>> to get away with intentional misinterpretation.
>>>>
>>>> Why do I need to erase them (like you seem to like to). It is CLEAR to
>>>> anyone with a sane mind how wrong your logic is, so I feel no need to
>>>> hide the words I am refuting.
>>>>
>>>> YOU are the one who reveal your heart by the way you dishonestly trim
>>>> messages, removing important content that you just don't want to deal
>>>> with.
>>>>
>>>> It is obvious to everyone how badly you are handling this. YOU are the
>>>> one stuck in unsound logic due to an unsound mindset.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Intentional misinterpretation is a form of lying. The fact that you
>>>>> keep
>>>>> erasing these words seems to be evidence that you are lying:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, YOU seem to INTENTIONALLY misuse words, which as you say is LYING.
>>>>
>>>> I hope you are prepared to meet your maker with this sin deeply in your
>>>> heart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing each
>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>
>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>
>>
>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>> simulation.
>>
>
> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>
>

But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.

Simple analogy:

Follow I-90 west, and keep on going to the end, you will end in Seattle.

Instead, follow it until your hit Butte, and then follow I-15 South, the
you get to San Diego.

San Diego is NOT Seattle.

Remember, the fact that the first invocation is currently running as a
'pure' simulator doesn't mean that it can assume that another invocation
will ALWAYS be a pure simulator so that it can treat it as such.

You are claiming a rule, can you prove that this rule is correct, that
it is sound? Can you even show someone else agreeing to this rule?

The clear answer is that NO ONE else (at least not someone who has any
sort of reputation) will hold this rule you want to apply.

It is also clear that you have no idea on how to even attempt to prove
your rule.

If everyone disagrees with you, perhaps you should take a close look to
see why. The most likely case is that you are wrong.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<sfhn78$1shr$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19898&group=comp.theory#19898

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!ux6ld97kLXxG8kVFFLnoWg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: chris.m....@gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 18:19:35 -0700
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <sfhn78$1shr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<cdd186c7-7d3a-45f6-b4e8-3bfe85ef6075n@googlegroups.com>
<vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com>
<kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com>
<v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com>
<eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com>
<sfhg3i$1l3g$1@gioia.aioe.org> <xPYSI.12$Oz2.10@fx47.iad>
<sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<t_6dnaRzH5_awoH8nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="62011"; posting-host="ux6ld97kLXxG8kVFFLnoWg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
Content-Language: en-US
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Chris M. Thomasson - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:19 UTC

On 8/17/2021 6:15 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 8:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 5:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 7:18 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can he emulate lock cmpxchg?
>>>
>>> It is very possible to emulate ANY instruction. Some require a bit more
>>> care than others.
>>>
>>> Since is emulator is really only emulating a single thread of execution,
>>> so things like locks are really not that important.
>>>
>>
>> Okay, well does he have cmpxchg, xadd, xchg, completed? Just wondering.
>
> https://github.com/wfeldt/libx86emu
>

Yikes! I forgot that 386 does not support CMPXCHG or XADD, my bad,
sorry! It does have XCHG. Mixed in some 486. ;^o

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19899&group=comp.theory#19899

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:24:14 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:24:12 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 164
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8g2adeXtqcgFIPbYxzdch2tNOW0o3StHX6vxGpbYWkNNKx1JQDxW0EIEJMZ97EoKFndX0v6rW/1aaXh!j6uuEZs+C2+hvmxRTSKz/kyUx0kwsxOcWvlGEYkXZFpABJvTM4OjN+Nwd28DofLzohOxnJ8PvesG!tYU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 8954
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:24 UTC

On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 9:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 7:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 6:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/21 11:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 5:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 9:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please read the definitions again.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A Pure simulator NEVER aborts its simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like I said you probably have to reread what I say a few hundred
>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>> times before you will understand it. I can no longer tolerate
>>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>> that continually glace at a few words before forming their
>>>>>>>>>> rebuttal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ok, so you just admit that you aren't using the real definition.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you reread it a few hundred more times you will see that I did
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> use the term incorrectly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then please provide a reliable source that shows the term being
>>>>>>> used in
>>>>>>> that manner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is self-evident that the term is being used correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe to someone who is pathologically wrong and admits to not having
>>>>> studied the theory.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is WRONG, thoroughly W-R-O-N-G
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WW      WW  RRRRRRRR    OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>>> WW      WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NNNN    NN  GG      GG
>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG
>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RRRRRRRR    OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG  GGGGGG
>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR  RR      OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG      GG
>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR    RR    OO      OO  NN    NNNN  GG      GG
>>>>> WWWWWWWWWW  RR      RR  OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe you should look at what I said, and try to find anyone else (with
>>>>> a positive reputation) that agrees with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note, the operative feature that a pure simulator has is that it
>>>>> produces the exact same result as the machine it is simulating would.
>>>>> Your claimed pure simulator doesn't, as you claim that its input is
>>>>> non-halting but the simulator is halting.
>>>>>
>>>>> At BEST you have a claim of some 'new use' of the term but then you
>>>>> need
>>>>> to actually prove that your transformation is valid for this sort of
>>>>> machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please TRY to find someone who shows ANY evidence that it is valid to
>>>>> replace the simulation of this sort of machine you are calling a 'pure
>>>>> simulator' (one that eventually abort its simulation) with a simulation
>>>>> of the machine it is simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> THAT is where you fully hit the wall of UNSOUND logic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your 'logic' is totally unsound, as is your instance on it. It as truly
>>>>> reached the point where it has just devolved into a blatant lie.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your evaluation that the term is not being used correctly is entirely
>>>>>> based on the fact that you are simply skipping over and ignoring
>>>>>> some of
>>>>>> the words that I said. If you are very careful to make sure that you
>>>>>> read and understand every single word then you will see that I am
>>>>>> using
>>>>>> the term "simulation" correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> WRONG. I go by the DEFINITION of the word. Note, it isn't 'simulator'
>>>>> that I disagree with. Your machine is definitely a partial
>>>>> simulator. It
>>>>> just isn't a 'Pure' simulator that simulates to the 'end' of the
>>>>> machine
>>>>> it is simulating, which is what is needed to use the transformation you
>>>>> want to use.
>>>>>
>>>>> You machine is most definitely a PARTIAL Simulator, for which you have
>>>>> no grounds to use that transformation.
>>>>>
>>>>> You just are so ignorant of the field, that you don't understand the
>>>>> difference, and so ignorant of the rules of logic to realize that you
>>>>> really do need to try to prove your assertions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By making sure to erase the words that I said it would seem to be
>>>>>> easier
>>>>>> to get away with intentional misinterpretation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do I need to erase them (like you seem to like to). It is CLEAR to
>>>>> anyone with a sane mind how wrong your logic is, so I feel no need to
>>>>> hide the words I am refuting.
>>>>>
>>>>> YOU are the one who reveal your heart by the way you dishonestly trim
>>>>> messages, removing important content that you just don't want to deal
>>>>> with.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is obvious to everyone how badly you are handling this. YOU are the
>>>>> one stuck in unsound logic due to an unsound mindset.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Intentional misinterpretation is a form of lying. The fact that you
>>>>>> keep
>>>>>> erasing these words seems to be evidence that you are lying:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, YOU seem to INTENTIONALLY misuse words, which as you say is LYING.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope you are prepared to meet your maker with this sin deeply in your
>>>>> heart.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing each
>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>
>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>> simulation.
>>>
>>
>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>
>>
>
> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>
It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
status decision.

If you have to spend four hours reading those words again and again to
get <all> of the meaning of <every> word then do this.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<PeCdnatk1fv4_oH8nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19900&group=comp.theory#19900

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.uzoreto.com!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:33:25 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com> <kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com> <v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com> <BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com> <KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com> <eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com> <sfhg3i$1l3g$1@gioia.aioe.org> <xPYSI.12$Oz2.10@fx47.iad> <sfhmn4$1kgc$2@gioia.aioe.org> <t_6dnaRzH5_awoH8nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <sfhn78$1shr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:33:23 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <sfhn78$1shr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <PeCdnatk1fv4_oH8nZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 36
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-eNCNVYbldOLz9kwXaBiWcgibwVjPVzg0CHjU+Dypt9FOCVUdCGG9fQQXJhcVMYJBHdg4WvnLqiZz9tD!3Hc0Px9GNXE7e9PKSpyEhPifPy7gBLIeXtACmyp9VyfI4EJ7Vkj41wDKAbTMzwQyjpd1yCrajtQN!ENI=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3326
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:33 UTC

On 8/17/2021 8:19 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 6:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 8:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 5:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 7:18 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can he emulate lock cmpxchg?
>>>>
>>>> It is very possible to emulate ANY instruction. Some require a bit more
>>>> care than others.
>>>>
>>>> Since is emulator is really only emulating a single thread of
>>>> execution,
>>>> so things like locks are really not that important.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, well does he have cmpxchg, xadd, xchg, completed? Just wondering.
>>
>> https://github.com/wfeldt/libx86emu
>>
>
> Yikes! I forgot that 386 does not support CMPXCHG or XADD, my bad,
> sorry! It does have XCHG. Mixed in some 486. ;^o

It might even do Pentium instructions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings

I only need a tiny subset of the 80386 instructions so that is why I
refer to its as being capable of 80386 emulation.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19901&group=comp.theory#19901

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx05.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 204
Message-ID: <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:35:21 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 9988
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:35 UTC

On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 9:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 7:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 6:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/21 11:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 5:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 9:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/21 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Please read the definitions again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A Pure simulator NEVER aborts its simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Like I said you probably have to reread what I say a few hundred
>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>> times before you will understand it. I can no longer tolerate
>>>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>>>> that continually glace at a few words before forming their
>>>>>>>>>>> rebuttal.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ok, so you just admit that you aren't using the real definition.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you reread it a few hundred more times you will see that I did
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> use the term incorrectly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then please provide a reliable source that shows the term being
>>>>>>>> used in
>>>>>>>> that manner.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is self-evident that the term is being used correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe to someone who is pathologically wrong and admits to not having
>>>>>> studied the theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is WRONG, thoroughly W-R-O-N-G
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WW      WW  RRRRRRRR    OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>>>> WW      WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NNNN    NN  GG      GG
>>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR      RR  OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG
>>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RRRRRRRR    OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG  GGGGGG
>>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR  RR      OO      OO  NN  NN  NN  GG      GG
>>>>>> WW  WW  WW  RR    RR    OO      OO  NN    NNNN  GG      GG
>>>>>> WWWWWWWWWW  RR      RR  OOOOOOOOOO  NN      NN    GGGGGG
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe you should look at what I said, and try to find anyone else
>>>>>> (with
>>>>>> a positive reputation) that agrees with you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note, the operative feature that a pure simulator has is that it
>>>>>> produces the exact same result as the machine it is simulating would.
>>>>>> Your claimed pure simulator doesn't, as you claim that its input is
>>>>>> non-halting but the simulator is halting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At BEST you have a claim of some 'new use' of the term but then you
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> to actually prove that your transformation is valid for this sort of
>>>>>> machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please TRY to find someone who shows ANY evidence that it is valid to
>>>>>> replace the simulation of this sort of machine you are calling a
>>>>>> 'pure
>>>>>> simulator' (one that eventually abort its simulation) with a
>>>>>> simulation
>>>>>> of the machine it is simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THAT is where you fully hit the wall of UNSOUND logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your 'logic' is totally unsound, as is your instance on it. It as
>>>>>> truly
>>>>>> reached the point where it has just devolved into a blatant lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your evaluation that the term is not being used correctly is
>>>>>>> entirely
>>>>>>> based on the fact that you are simply skipping over and ignoring
>>>>>>> some of
>>>>>>> the words that I said. If you are very careful to make sure that you
>>>>>>> read and understand every single word then you will see that I am
>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>> the term "simulation" correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WRONG. I go by the DEFINITION of the word. Note, it isn't 'simulator'
>>>>>> that I disagree with. Your machine is definitely a partial
>>>>>> simulator. It
>>>>>> just isn't a 'Pure' simulator that simulates to the 'end' of the
>>>>>> machine
>>>>>> it is simulating, which is what is needed to use the
>>>>>> transformation you
>>>>>> want to use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You machine is most definitely a PARTIAL Simulator, for which you
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> no grounds to use that transformation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You just are so ignorant of the field, that you don't understand the
>>>>>> difference, and so ignorant of the rules of logic to realize that you
>>>>>> really do need to try to prove your assertions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By making sure to erase the words that I said it would seem to be
>>>>>>> easier
>>>>>>> to get away with intentional misinterpretation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do I need to erase them (like you seem to like to). It is
>>>>>> CLEAR to
>>>>>> anyone with a sane mind how wrong your logic is, so I feel no need to
>>>>>> hide the words I am refuting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YOU are the one who reveal your heart by the way you dishonestly trim
>>>>>> messages, removing important content that you just don't want to deal
>>>>>> with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is obvious to everyone how badly you are handling this. YOU are
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> one stuck in unsound logic due to an unsound mindset.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Intentional misinterpretation is a form of lying. The fact that you
>>>>>>> keep
>>>>>>> erasing these words seems to be evidence that you are lying:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, YOU seem to INTENTIONALLY misuse words, which as you say is
>>>>>> LYING.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope you are prepared to meet your maker with this sin deeply in
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> heart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>> each
>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>
>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>> simulation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>
> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
> status decision.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19902&group=comp.theory#19902

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:40:28 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:40:26 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 44
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-a1wR0I5ESh9EYSNkCu01QLh20NC+gZdAAua9pSZDZ/R4gcRCmmjeXQYIrtEnW6BbYjtIpyTD7WEjbvr!Na1c0R4nKP8gZsFIPlSqzSwyfbQ1XgdRPUJIOCQpVRNbD8BBvNJbhbhIRGLc3Sp9Dx1ATqwIm9Uf!HI0=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3818
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:40 UTC

On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>>
>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
>> status decision.
>
>
> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.

X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status decision"

You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19903&group=comp.theory#19903

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx11.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:49:06 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4427
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 01:49 UTC

On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>>>
>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
>>> status decision.
>>
>>
>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>
> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status decision"
>
> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>

I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.

The DEFINITION of a Pure Simulator, based on the definition of a UTM is
a machine that exactly reproduces the behavior of the machine
represented by its input.

H, which acts like a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
decision, AND THEN aborts its simulation, has FAILED to exactly
reproduce the behavior of the machine represented by its input.

If the input IS an infinite computation, then the exactly reproduction
of this behavior is an infinite computation. If H decides that this
input is an infinit computation, and thus aborts its simulation, it
creates a finite computation.

A finite computatiojn is NOT an exact reproduction of an infinite
compuutation.

Thus H is NOT really a Pure Simulation.

You were a minor until you turned 18. Does that mean you are still a Minor?

You have TOTALLY UNSOUND logic.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19904&group=comp.theory#19904

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:04:09 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:04:04 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 56
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-OqU0srjU4btMGqyJuEvXa/868Pl2EI0agBEq6S3NZlMO/rMVD2liWbs+XQ2j81TX7AEDkYTrpe+B1bJ!q4/pJe5XS/7ySGo+S+hHVczWfXZ9jGw22Vtv3iydqUXWMIJuKagpdVX1e/0TrTKMB1Fb+gefrObZ!x+M=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4410
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 02:04 UTC

On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while it is
>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is making its
>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>>>>
>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
>>>> status decision.
>>>
>>>
>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>
>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status decision"
>>
>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>
>
> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.

I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.

You don't even understand the difference between the two English words
"some" and "all". That is a very very stupid mistake.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19905&group=comp.theory#19905

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!nntp.speedium.network!feeder01!81.171.65.13.MISMATCH!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx47.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad> <YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad> <BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad> <N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad> <a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad> <2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad> <HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad> <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad> <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad> <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad> <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 22:36:20 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4655
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 02:36 UTC

On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
>>>>> status decision.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>
>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status decision"
>>>
>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>
>>
>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.
>
> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.

Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.

This is like saying you are immortal until you die, it isn't a
transitory category. If you die, you were NEVER immortal.

H may act somewhat like a pure simulator for a while, but that doesn't
make it one.

>
> You don't even understand the difference between the two English words
> "some" and "all". That is a very very stupid mistake.
>

The problem is that the transform you want to make requires that the
simulator be a REAL pure simulator, which means it needs to be one ALL
of the time.

UNSOUND LOGIC, BAD RESEULTS.

If you tell the truth for a while, and then lie, you are still a liar.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19906&group=comp.theory#19906

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!tr3.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:50:49 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad> <YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad> <BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad> <N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad> <a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad> <2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad> <HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad> <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad> <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad> <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad> <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 21:50:47 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 63
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8fD077kLjwcqGzeaYlQ20vVsLjzy6hkAVY1abBhf4Jl8crJ+1Hb0eythB4tgIxPHcrWTHpi94x5bOKN!n3o5UaLNP8c/3wa165khrgLGzjE+U/3bRBtruc+iBc3O5VYMm5BJxsGDoCCHk1lgu/Sb1A6+VZNy!FF8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4708
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 02:50 UTC

On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully critqueing
>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status decision
>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this halt
>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>
>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status decision"
>>>>
>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.
>>
>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>
> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.

Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This seems
to be beyond your capacity to understand.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19907&group=comp.theory#19907

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder5.feed.usenet.farm!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx34.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 23:10:35 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 6188
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 03:10 UTC

On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>
>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>> decision"
>>>>>
>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.
>>>
>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>
>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>
> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This seems
> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>

No, It can't. PERIOD.

H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
for copies of it in the simulation.

You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.

If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
equivalent.

The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator (possibly
being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the execution
of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.

You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.

H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
pure simulatior.

In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19908&group=comp.theory#19908

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 22:17:40 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 22:17:38 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 116
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-oq90GMZJaWMQQ7VsirCQ/G30DlWvFcKnMn2corfVb9MK/FDv2Ca+r5tV9VVUow881N9QYd1m2d4FLwC!y9vh0BgkdsVzuUOtnpyeyISXHs6wq8dBnWmA9tsXY1zygoCxe3hRC8WTuZENtfwOGaD71cicw3Rn!glU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 7059
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 03:17 UTC

On 8/17/2021 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>>> decision"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not true.
>>>>
>>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
>>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>>
>>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>>
>> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
>> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This seems
>> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>>
>
> No, It can't. PERIOD.
>
> H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
> but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
> for copies of it in the simulation.
>

Every recursive invocation of H continues to act like a pure simulator
until after H makes it halt status decision.

This allows Every recursive invocation of H to totally ignore its own
execution in every halt status analysis execution trace.

> You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
> machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
> simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.
>
> If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
> that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
> it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
> transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
> traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
> equivalent.
>
> The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator (possibly
> being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
> H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the execution
> of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.
>
> You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.
>
> H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
> input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
> affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
> pure simulatior.
>
> In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
> switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
> that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
> halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
> 'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
> doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.
>

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19909&group=comp.theory#19909

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.uzoreto.com!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx44.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<iTCSI.65035$EF2.32920@fx47.iad>
<YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 143
Message-ID: <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 23:37:12 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 7958
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 03:37 UTC

On 8/17/21 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>>>> decision"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not
>>>>>> true.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
>>>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>>>
>>>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>>>
>>> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
>>> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This seems
>>> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>>>
>>
>> No, It can't. PERIOD.
>>
>> H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
>> but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
>> for copies of it in the simulation.
>>
>
> Every recursive invocation of H continues to act like a pure simulator
> until after H makes it halt status decision.

UNSOUND.

Since H at some point will STOP being a pure simulator, its affect on
the machine CALLING it is NOT the same as a Pure Simulator.

You have a false premise in your logic so you have an UNSOUND argument.

>
> This allows Every recursive invocation of H to totally ignore its own
> execution in every halt status analysis execution trace.

FALSE. Prove your claim. Really, Try to.

UNSOUND.

H may be able to ignore the affect of its own aborting on the behavior
of the machine it is simulating, but it MUST take into account that same
aborting behavior in the invocation of the copies of it the machine it
is simulating, as that activity DOES affect those machines.

Remember, The fact that H0 is aborting the simulation of P1 doesn't
affect the real behavior of P1, thus we do need to look at what P1 would
do if H0 didn't abort it, and from your run of P0, we know that after
just a little bit more, H1 will also decide to abort its simulation of
P2, and then return to P1 and then P1 will Halt.

Thus, since the decision of H0 to abort doesn't affect the behavior of
the machine that is its input, we see that P1 is STILL a Halting
Computation, and that H1 will FAIL to be a Pure Simulation, so H0 is in
error for treating it as one.

>
>> You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
>> machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
>> simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.
>>
>> If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
>> that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
>> it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
>> transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
>> traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
>> equivalent.
>>
>> The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator (possibly
>> being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
>> H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the execution
>> of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.
>>
>> You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.
>>
>> H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
>> input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
>> affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
>> pure simulatior.
>>
>> In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
>> switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
>> that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
>> halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
>> 'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
>> doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.
>>
>
>

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19910&group=comp.theory#19910

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.uzoreto.com!tr3.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 23:09:46 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <YPSdnaZYl6wunIb8nZ2dnUU7-VnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad> <BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad> <N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad> <a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad> <2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad> <HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad> <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad> <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad> <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad> <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad> <8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad> <QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 23:09:45 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 157
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-70KsYOGbdgke3k75uNMri+tRYIwTq+2IY+RqTNnwbbLYzo8JtQqRBJuegJ3rMJcS/ha0qcK0bLKKiUm!hbnH9a/5eBzBLTJdV4e9NTsKKIpxFDelZ5awtdXAi0W7/V02O2ko+8orlsm0Ir1CT9hIB8GSAq3E!tF8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 8746
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:09 UTC

On 8/17/2021 10:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/21 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it terminates its
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code while
>>>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>>>>> decision"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not
>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>>>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the time
>>>>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>>>>
>>>> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
>>>> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This seems
>>>> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, It can't. PERIOD.
>>>
>>> H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
>>> but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
>>> for copies of it in the simulation.
>>>
>>
>> Every recursive invocation of H continues to act like a pure simulator
>> until after H makes it halt status decision.
>
> UNSOUND.
>
> Since H at some point will STOP being a pure simulator, its affect on
> the machine CALLING it is NOT the same as a Pure Simulator.
>

While H does nothing to change the behavior of its input
H does do something that changes the behavior of its input.

By this same reasoning all black cats are white.

> You have a false premise in your logic so you have an UNSOUND argument.
>
>>
>> This allows Every recursive invocation of H to totally ignore its own
>> execution in every halt status analysis execution trace.
>
> FALSE. Prove your claim. Really, Try to.
>
> UNSOUND.
>
> H may be able to ignore the affect of its own aborting on the behavior
> of the machine it is simulating, but it MUST take into account that same
> aborting behavior in the invocation of the copies of it the machine it
> is simulating, as that activity DOES affect those machines.
>
> Remember, The fact that H0 is aborting the simulation of P1 doesn't
> affect the real behavior of P1, thus we do need to look at what P1 would
> do if H0 didn't abort it, and from your run of P0, we know that after
> just a little bit more, H1 will also decide to abort its simulation of
> P2, and then return to P1 and then P1 will Halt.
>
> Thus, since the decision of H0 to abort doesn't affect the behavior of
> the machine that is its input, we see that P1 is STILL a Halting
> Computation, and that H1 will FAIL to be a Pure Simulation, so H0 is in
> error for treating it as one.
>
>>
>>> You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
>>> machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
>>> simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.
>>>
>>> If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
>>> that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
>>> it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
>>> transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
>>> traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
>>> equivalent.
>>>
>>> The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator (possibly
>>> being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
>>> H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the execution
>>> of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.
>>>
>>> You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.
>>>
>>> H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
>>> input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
>>> affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
>>> pure simulatior.
>>>
>>> In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
>>> switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
>>> that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
>>> halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
>>> 'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
>>> doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.
>>>
>>
>>
>

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<Af5TI.23$Oz2.6@fx47.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19911&group=comp.theory#19911

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx47.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
<1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 195
Message-ID: <Af5TI.23$Oz2.6@fx47.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 06:26:38 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 9593
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 10:26 UTC

On 8/18/21 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 10:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/17/21 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2021 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminates its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code
>>>>>>>>>>>>> while
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>>>>>> decision"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not
>>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>>>>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the
>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
>>>>> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This
>>>>> seems
>>>>> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, It can't. PERIOD.
>>>>
>>>> H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
>>>> but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
>>>> for copies of it in the simulation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Every recursive invocation of H continues to act like a pure simulator
>>> until after H makes it halt status decision.
>>
>> UNSOUND.
>>
>> Since H at some point will STOP being a pure simulator, its affect on
>> the machine CALLING it is NOT the same as a Pure Simulator.
>>
>
> While H does nothing to change the behavior of its input
> H does do something that changes the behavior of its input.

Not what I said.

H does affect the machine that uses it.

H0 does not affect the behavior of the machine that is represented by
its input, P1.

H1, which is used by P1, does affect the behavior of P1.

If you want to try some stained logic to claim that No H affects the
behavior of any P because an instance of P is used as an instance of H
then you are using Unsound Logic.

By the method of construction, the behavior of P is directly controlled
by the behavior of H.

To deny that is to say you are not following the pattern.

FFFFFFFFFF AA IIIIIIIIII LL
FF AA AA II LL
FF AA AA II LL
FFFFFF AAAAAAAAAA II LL
FF AA AA II LL
FF AA AA II LL
FF AA AA IIIIIIIIII LLLLLLLLLL

>
> By this same reasoning all black cats are white.

Nope. Strawman.

UNSOUND LOGIC.

Please try to actually PROVE something, you are just using rhetorical
arguments that aren't actually very good.

>
>> You have a false premise in your logic so you have an UNSOUND argument.
>>
>>>
>>> This allows Every recursive invocation of H to totally ignore its own
>>> execution in every halt status analysis execution trace.
>>
>> FALSE. Prove your claim. Really, Try to.
>>
>> UNSOUND.
>>
>> H may be able to ignore the affect of its own aborting on the behavior
>> of the machine it is simulating, but it MUST take into account that same
>> aborting behavior in the invocation of the copies of it the machine it
>> is simulating, as that activity DOES affect those machines.
>>
>> Remember, The fact that H0 is aborting the simulation of P1 doesn't
>> affect the real behavior of P1, thus we do need to look at what P1 would
>> do if H0 didn't abort it, and from your run of P0, we know that after
>> just a little bit more, H1 will also decide to abort its simulation of
>> P2, and then return to P1 and then P1 will Halt.
>>
>> Thus, since the decision of H0 to abort doesn't affect the behavior of
>> the machine that is its input, we see that P1 is STILL a Halting
>> Computation, and that H1 will FAIL to be a Pure Simulation, so H0 is in
>> error for treating it as one.
>>
>>>
>>>> You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
>>>> machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
>>>> simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.
>>>>
>>>> If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
>>>> that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
>>>> it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
>>>> transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
>>>> traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
>>>> equivalent.
>>>>
>>>> The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator
>>>> (possibly
>>>> being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
>>>> H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the
>>>> execution
>>>> of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.
>>>>
>>>> You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.
>>>>
>>>> H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
>>>> input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
>>>> affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
>>>> pure simulatior.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
>>>> switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
>>>> that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
>>>> halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
>>>> 'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
>>>> doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<7s6TI.39$KC1.15@fx33.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19912&group=comp.theory#19912

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc3.netnews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx33.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<MSDSI.24014$6p.13563@fx36.iad>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
<1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <7s6TI.39$KC1.15@fx33.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:48:18 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4514
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:48 UTC

On 8/18/21 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:

> While H does nothing to change the behavior of its input
> H does do something that changes the behavior of its input.
>
> By this same reasoning all black cats are white.
>
Thinking on this, I would like to point out a FUNDAMENTAL problem with
all your arguments, you presume that if you come up with some pithy
statement that sounds sort of true, you can just assume it to be true
and move on from there.

This is WRONG.

Every statement, other than the fundamental axioms of the system, that
everyone agrees to, needs to be proven, actually proven.

You don't get to add new axioms to an existing system except with BROAD
community support.

Fortunately, many things have already been proven, so we are allowed to
rely on existing proofs, but to do that, it requires us to have actually
studied the field to know what has been proven.

Note, many times I have asked you if you can show someone else who has
the same idea. I do this because it has been clear that YOU don't know
how to even write a proper proof, so if you can't prove it, you need to
rely on statements that others have proven.

Maybe you haven't studied logic theory enough to know that rule, but
that just says that you have fallen into the same trap that the ancient
philosophers did until the worked out the actual rules of logic.
Knowledge is built of actual PROOFS, not just fancy rhetorical
arguments. There are many things that at first seem to be true, but when
we examine them more closely we find that they are not.

For instance, many will say that the next term in this sequence:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16 is obviously going to be 32, but in some problems the
right answer is 31. This is the case of dividing a circle into areas
with complete graphs

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividing_a_circle_into_areas)

This sort of case shows that intuition and what the simple meaning of
words is NOT sufficient to determine truth.

Therefore, what you REALLY need to do to make your proof workable, is to
look at your fundamental ideas that you base it on, go back to the field
to see if someone else has actually proven that idea, and if so, look at
the proof to refine what that idea actually means (your big problem is
that many of your statements are mostly true, you just have a wrong
slant in them).

Learn what HAS been proven as a base. Then you can have things you can
actually work with to use. The Fundamental are much harder to actually
prove than later ideas, because you need to prove the fundamentals from
just the barest of axioms.

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<f8e72e46-d9a4-42fc-9cf5-ec9b4fee5d1cn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19913&group=comp.theory#19913

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:138c:: with SMTP id o12mr7518766qtk.346.1629287569759;
Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:6e05:: with SMTP id j5mr10965925ybc.86.1629287569516;
Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc3.netnews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 04:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <w9WdnXCnjMoi3IH8nZ2dnUU7-YfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=58.115.187.102; posting-account=QJ9iEwoAAACyjkKjQAWQOwSEULNvZZkc
NNTP-Posting-Host: 58.115.187.102
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<cdd186c7-7d3a-45f6-b4e8-3bfe85ef6075n@googlegroups.com> <vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com> <kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com> <v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com> <BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com> <KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com> <NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com> <eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com> <w9WdnXCnjMoi3IH8nZ2dnUU7-YfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f8e72e46-d9a4-42fc-9cf5-ec9b4fee5d1cn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
From: wyni...@gmail.com (wij)
Injection-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:52:49 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 13382
 by: wij - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:52 UTC

On Wednesday, 18 August 2021 at 07:09:58 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> On 8/17/2021 6:01 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 18 August 2021 at 05:00:44 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/17/2021 12:35 AM, wij wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 06:58:05 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2021 1:27 AM, wij wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, 16 August 2021 at 00:44:43 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/15/2021 9:45 AM, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 21:45:09 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 8/15/2021 2:50 AM, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 02:24:42 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 1:09 PM, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 01:22:11 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 11:35 AM, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 00:16:20 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 11:05 AM, wij wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 23:18:03 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This exact same analysis always applies to the input to H(P,P) no matter
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how it is called including this example:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P((u32)P);
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Turing machine halting problem. Simply stated, the problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is: given the description of a Turing machine M and an input w,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does M, when started in the initial configuration q0w, perform a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> computation that eventually halts? (Linz:1990:317).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to run forever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the halting problem only requires that the (at least partial)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt decider decide its input correctly the fact that the direct
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invocation of P(P) is not an input to H, means that it is not relevant
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the halting problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know English well, but I (almost every programmer) am sure the halting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem means a program H decides whether P(input) will halt or not.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the quoted texts is read to you differently, it is the problem of that texts.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Submit message to the authors.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The quoted texts are accurate. The (at least partial) halt decider must
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only correctly decide the halt status of its input. Computations that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are not inputs to the halt decider do not pertain to the halting problem.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Obviously the quoted text means differently to you and almost all programmers in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the world. You are addressing your own interpretation. This is OK, but the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> interpretation is meaningless.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "the description of a Turing machine M" does not mean Turing machine M.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If people interpret this to mean Turing machine M they are wrong.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Then, both Linz and the author of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
> >>>>>>>>>>> are also wrong, I and almost all programmers in the world can guarantee you this.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If both authors are also wrong, replying the rest message is meaningless.
> >>>>>>>>>>> You need to submit your interpretation to Linz and the author of the wiki.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I think that the problem is that your English is not so good.
> >>>>>>>>>> The Linz text and the Wiki text are correct.
> >>>>>>>>>> Linz retired many years ago.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> In your recent post somewhere, you said:
> >>>>>>>>> "I made my refutation of Linz a little more clear by changing all of the
> >>>>>>>>> subscripts to be numeric. My refutation of Linz cannot be properly
> >>>>>>>>> understood until after my refutation of simplified Linz / Strachey is
> >>>>>>>>> first understood..."
> >>>>>>>>> Now, you changed mind to say "The Linz text and the Wiki text are correct."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This text right here is correct:
> >>>>>>>> the Turing machine halting problem. Simply stated, the problem
> >>>>>>>> is: given the description of a Turing machine M and an input w,
> >>>>>>>> does M, when started in the initial configuration q0w, perform a
> >>>>>>>> computation that eventually halts? (Linz:1990:317).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of
> >>>>>>>> determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program
> >>>>>>>> and an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue
> >>>>>>>> to run forever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
> >>>>>>>> All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
> >>>>>>>> solved it incorrect.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Which one did you mean:
> >>>>>>> 1. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
> >>>>>>> solved incorrect. (still ambiguous)
> >>>>>>> 2. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot
> >>>>>>> solve incorrect. (ambiguous)
> >>>>>>> 3. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
> >>>>>>> solved, it is incorrect.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
> >>>>>> solved <IS> incorrect.
> >>>>>>>>> There are much more inconsistent statements in your posts, like "H is a total
> >>>>>>>>> function",...,etc. (I do not have time to re-find them).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> H is a pure function of its inputs in that all of the nested simulations
> >>>>>>>> are simply data derived entirely on the basis of this inputs.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From your description:
> >>>>>>> "The x86utm operating system uses a single contiguous block of RAM to
> >>>>>>> most precisely map to the concept of a single contiguous Turing machine
> >>>>>>> tape. All of the code and data of the virtual machines that it executes
> >>>>>>> are contained in this single contiguous block. There is no virtual
> >>>>>>> memory paging in the x86utm operating system."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I believe your H is a 'pure function', you are actually dealing with two "C"
> >>>>>>> function calls. H is not really a simulator as you keeps calling it so.
> >>>>>>> Show me how H(P,P) takes its input P as 'simple data'.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> The x86utm operating system is build from an x86 emulator capable of
> >>>>>> emulating all of the 80386 instructions using 4 GB of RAM.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Firstly, 'x86utm operating system'(all from power on) is likely a misleading name .
> >>>>> Secondly, if 'x86 emulator' do exist, it is likely a bought commodity, because
> >>>>> I do not believe you can build a machine or software capable of emulating ALL of
> >>>>> the 80386 instructions. Therefore, I assume all you have is a simulating
> >>>>> application.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The following x86utm operating system function calls the x86 emulator to
> >>>>>> emulate exactly one instruction of the slave process and then return to
> >>>>>> the calling process. It also decodes the slave instruction that was
> >>>>>> emulated so that it can be stored in the execution trace.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> u32 DebugStep(Registers* master_state,
> >>>>>> Registers* slave_state,
> >>>>>> Decoded_Line_Of_Code* decoded) {}
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The question how H(P,P) treats its argument P,P as data is still not answered.
> >>>> The details need not be specified to understand that all the simulations
> >>>> of the executed simulator are data belonging to the executed H. Details
> >>>> merely provide the means for endless digression away from the key point.
> >>>>> E.g. does H contain a call to DebugStep to decode P pointed byte string data?
> >>>>> Actually, there are many implementing problems for your simulator H and P to
> >>>>> be a valid proof. But, I saw your reply to Mike Terry that you seem to 'realize'
> >>>>> the simulation is not necessary for the proof.
> >>>>>
> >>>> The code does what it specifies that it does that alone is complete
> >>>> proof. We can know for sure that H does perform a pure simulation of P
> >>>> because the x86 code specified by P is exactly exactly as this code
> >>>> specifies.
> >>>
> >>> What is the 'proof'? What is exactly the 'code'?
> >>>
> >>> 1. You are not capable of creating a "x86utm operating system".
> >>> 2. You are not capable of understanding all 80386 instructions (no even 80186,80286).
> >>> 3. You do not even understand C function and TM language properly.
> >>> 4. You do not know logic.
> >>> 5. You do not have a real H and P.
> >>> 6. What you have are brainless talk and lies.
> >>>
> >>> Tell everyone, which one of the above is false.
> >> I take the above as your indication that you intend to only act like a
> >> troll and thing else..
> >
> > I intended to point you to the true thing that you keep blocking yourself.
> > So, I put them again in more suspicious/polite way. One reason is that you are
> > too cunning in argument.
> >
> > 1. Did you actually created a "x86utm operating system"? An OS means the software
> > BIOS passes to immediately after power on.
> It is stupid to narrowly define an operating system this way.
> > 2. Do you really understand all 80386 instructions? I remember you said you
> > have 'emulated' them. I am sure you are not capable of doing this, but you keep
> > questioning people do not understand x86 assembly, thus do not understand your
> > proof. Actually, I do not believe you can emulate any of the less powerful x86
> > assembly 80286,80186,8086,8088,8048...
> I totally understand all of the 80386 instructions that I am discussing,
> I am not emulating them I am calling a function that I wrote that calls
> another 3rd party x86 emulator.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<e8udnWT-uPa_jYD8nZ2dnUU7-S3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19914&group=comp.theory#19914

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:50:26 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<cdd186c7-7d3a-45f6-b4e8-3bfe85ef6075n@googlegroups.com>
<vM-dnYCGBvPRcYr8nZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<75407d56-1578-44f6-bd82-8428fa402e2fn@googlegroups.com>
<kNWdnaLxE7QhZor8nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ea3afea5-0188-4dbc-b3a4-af2ee2436228n@googlegroups.com>
<v8OdnTdARYH-l4X8nZ2dnUU7-X2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d5bbf5b0-8f01-4370-9ac9-cf38e2e1d0c9n@googlegroups.com>
<BZadnRNgE4LDh4T8nZ2dnUU7-fXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<407a228c-2484-4d5f-8e18-c0e47e9483adn@googlegroups.com>
<KtednRM4wpvu2YT8nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<06f505d8-e93c-4549-a017-af4eb3c70cedn@googlegroups.com>
<NoedncYda_jrcIf8nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<88890477-e0c7-4a32-92f3-d3999fa790a6n@googlegroups.com>
<eNednfQicdjovoH8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
<91782879-aa4b-4db8-a5fc-327dbfd3b9c9n@googlegroups.com>
<w9WdnXCnjMoi3IH8nZ2dnUU7-YfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<f8e72e46-d9a4-42fc-9cf5-ec9b4fee5d1cn@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:50:24 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f8e72e46-d9a4-42fc-9cf5-ec9b4fee5d1cn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <e8udnWT-uPa_jYD8nZ2dnUU7-S3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 232
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-MmV5KKgdrdwfybsL7cvuvFhgQ1Q+r4N/V0a5SGG/ZOmk4Vp+fVOPt0cU+r9zvYVXsFQubOeT0j07/+j!5M9TA1BpDh+1m7kojogOe/0eFJt3P3qbcjg5H2CFKDlyUGHD4pqSdcuxJAunz/XDQiWlIVMUHsV0!bYw=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 14612
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:50 UTC

On 8/18/2021 6:52 AM, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, 18 August 2021 at 07:09:58 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 6:01 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 18 August 2021 at 05:00:44 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 12:35 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 06:58:05 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2021 1:27 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, 16 August 2021 at 00:44:43 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2021 9:45 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 21:45:09 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2021 2:50 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 02:24:42 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 1:09 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 01:22:11 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 11:35 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 15 August 2021 at 00:16:20 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/14/2021 11:05 AM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, 14 August 2021 at 23:18:03 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This exact same analysis always applies to the input to H(P,P) no matter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how it is called including this example:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P((u32)P);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Turing machine halting problem. Simply stated, the problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is: given the description of a Turing machine M and an input w,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does M, when started in the initial configuration q0w, perform a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> computation that eventually halts? (Linz:1990:317).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to run forever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the halting problem only requires that the (at least partial)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt decider decide its input correctly the fact that the direct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invocation of P(P) is not an input to H, means that it is not relevant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the halting problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know English well, but I (almost every programmer) am sure the halting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem means a program H decides whether P(input) will halt or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the quoted texts is read to you differently, it is the problem of that texts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Submit message to the authors.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The quoted texts are accurate. The (at least partial) halt decider must
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only correctly decide the halt status of its input. Computations that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are not inputs to the halt decider do not pertain to the halting problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obviously the quoted text means differently to you and almost all programmers in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the world. You are addressing your own interpretation. This is OK, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpretation is meaningless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "the description of a Turing machine M" does not mean Turing machine M.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If people interpret this to mean Turing machine M they are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, both Linz and the author of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are also wrong, I and almost all programmers in the world can guarantee you this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If both authors are also wrong, replying the rest message is meaningless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to submit your interpretation to Linz and the author of the wiki.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that the problem is that your English is not so good.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Linz text and the Wiki text are correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Linz retired many years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In your recent post somewhere, you said:
>>>>>>>>>>> "I made my refutation of Linz a little more clear by changing all of the
>>>>>>>>>>> subscripts to be numeric. My refutation of Linz cannot be properly
>>>>>>>>>>> understood until after my refutation of simplified Linz / Strachey is
>>>>>>>>>>> first understood..."
>>>>>>>>>>> Now, you changed mind to say "The Linz text and the Wiki text are correct."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This text right here is correct:
>>>>>>>>>> the Turing machine halting problem. Simply stated, the problem
>>>>>>>>>> is: given the description of a Turing machine M and an input w,
>>>>>>>>>> does M, when started in the initial configuration q0w, perform a
>>>>>>>>>> computation that eventually halts? (Linz:1990:317).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of
>>>>>>>>>> determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program
>>>>>>>>>> and an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue
>>>>>>>>>> to run forever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>>>>>>>>> All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
>>>>>>>>>> solved it incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which one did you mean:
>>>>>>>>> 1. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
>>>>>>>>> solved incorrect. (still ambiguous)
>>>>>>>>> 2. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot
>>>>>>>>> solve incorrect. (ambiguous)
>>>>>>>>> 3. All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
>>>>>>>>> solved, it is incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All of the rest of the text that "proves" the halting problem cannot be
>>>>>>>> solved <IS> incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>> There are much more inconsistent statements in your posts, like "H is a total
>>>>>>>>>>> function",...,etc. (I do not have time to re-find them).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> H is a pure function of its inputs in that all of the nested simulations
>>>>>>>>>> are simply data derived entirely on the basis of this inputs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From your description:
>>>>>>>>> "The x86utm operating system uses a single contiguous block of RAM to
>>>>>>>>> most precisely map to the concept of a single contiguous Turing machine
>>>>>>>>> tape. All of the code and data of the virtual machines that it executes
>>>>>>>>> are contained in this single contiguous block. There is no virtual
>>>>>>>>> memory paging in the x86utm operating system."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I believe your H is a 'pure function', you are actually dealing with two "C"
>>>>>>>>> function calls. H is not really a simulator as you keeps calling it so.
>>>>>>>>> Show me how H(P,P) takes its input P as 'simple data'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The x86utm operating system is build from an x86 emulator capable of
>>>>>>>> emulating all of the 80386 instructions using 4 GB of RAM.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Firstly, 'x86utm operating system'(all from power on) is likely a misleading name .
>>>>>>> Secondly, if 'x86 emulator' do exist, it is likely a bought commodity, because
>>>>>>> I do not believe you can build a machine or software capable of emulating ALL of
>>>>>>> the 80386 instructions. Therefore, I assume all you have is a simulating
>>>>>>> application.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The following x86utm operating system function calls the x86 emulator to
>>>>>>>> emulate exactly one instruction of the slave process and then return to
>>>>>>>> the calling process. It also decodes the slave instruction that was
>>>>>>>> emulated so that it can be stored in the execution trace.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> u32 DebugStep(Registers* master_state,
>>>>>>>> Registers* slave_state,
>>>>>>>> Decoded_Line_Of_Code* decoded) {}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The question how H(P,P) treats its argument P,P as data is still not answered.
>>>>>> The details need not be specified to understand that all the simulations
>>>>>> of the executed simulator are data belonging to the executed H. Details
>>>>>> merely provide the means for endless digression away from the key point.
>>>>>>> E.g. does H contain a call to DebugStep to decode P pointed byte string data?
>>>>>>> Actually, there are many implementing problems for your simulator H and P to
>>>>>>> be a valid proof. But, I saw your reply to Mike Terry that you seem to 'realize'
>>>>>>> the simulation is not necessary for the proof.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The code does what it specifies that it does that alone is complete
>>>>>> proof. We can know for sure that H does perform a pure simulation of P
>>>>>> because the x86 code specified by P is exactly exactly as this code
>>>>>> specifies.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the 'proof'? What is exactly the 'code'?
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. You are not capable of creating a "x86utm operating system".
>>>>> 2. You are not capable of understanding all 80386 instructions (no even 80186,80286).
>>>>> 3. You do not even understand C function and TM language properly.
>>>>> 4. You do not know logic.
>>>>> 5. You do not have a real H and P.
>>>>> 6. What you have are brainless talk and lies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tell everyone, which one of the above is false.
>>>> I take the above as your indication that you intend to only act like a
>>>> troll and thing else..
>>>
>>> I intended to point you to the true thing that you keep blocking yourself.
>>> So, I put them again in more suspicious/polite way. One reason is that you are
>>> too cunning in argument.
>>>
>>> 1. Did you actually created a "x86utm operating system"? An OS means the software
>>> BIOS passes to immediately after power on.
>> It is stupid to narrowly define an operating system this way.
>>> 2. Do you really understand all 80386 instructions? I remember you said you
>>> have 'emulated' them. I am sure you are not capable of doing this, but you keep
>>> questioning people do not understand x86 assembly, thus do not understand your
>>> proof. Actually, I do not believe you can emulate any of the less powerful x86
>>> assembly 80286,80186,8086,8088,8048...
>> I totally understand all of the 80386 instructions that I am discussing,
>> I am not emulating them I am calling a function that I wrote that calls
>> another 3rd party x86 emulator.
>
> Ok, Q1 might be indirectly answered.
>
>>> 3. You do not seem to understand C function and TM language properly.
>>> 4. You do not seem to know the basic Logic.
>>> 5. You do not have a real H and P that match your description
>>> 6. What you have are brainless talk and lies. (This is actually your accusation
>>> to others.)
>>>
>> You are (as least currently) a mere jackass troll.
>
> Fact: No one (except you) knows whether your H exists or not.
> We are not talking about fantasy, do we?
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<Ee6dnb19NpQyjID8nZ2dnUU7-V3NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19915&group=comp.theory#19915

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!tr3.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:57:03 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad> <N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad> <a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad> <2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad> <HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad> <TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad> <XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad> <B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad> <s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad> <8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad> <QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad> <1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <Af5TI.23$Oz2.6@fx47.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:57:01 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Af5TI.23$Oz2.6@fx47.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Ee6dnb19NpQyjID8nZ2dnUU7-V3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 219
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-L6yx2aQazQywYOCDer6QI1QwQsxHWgipnWRBtghDiD0TbFZZb8WX7VaN/pcO/wSuKZQ3L/WO5zHWpx+!Dlt9ZDis9WG0Cr6WJj9+b3ZNlw1eJp1sPUIF8VLqlrszOk9f0SemXnksNoqIucSLHUFM4ZoeMKSp!/58=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 10856
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:57 UTC

On 8/18/2021 5:26 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/18/21 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2021 10:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/21 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2021 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/21 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/21 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you keep erasing these words rather than carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critqueing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of them sufficiently proves that you are dishonest:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Because H only acts as a pure simulator of its input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --until after its halt status decision has been made it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --has no behavior that can possibly effect the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --of its input. Because of this H screens out its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --address range in every execution trace that it examines.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --This is why we never see any instructions of H in any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --execution trace after an input calls H.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pure simulator *until*, Then it isn't because it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminates its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is this key fact that allows it to ignore its own code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making its halt status decision. The entire time that it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt status decision <it is> a pure simulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then it isn't, so the copy that it was simulating wasn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It <is> a pure simulator until after it makes its halt status
>>>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore it <can> ignore its own code <while> it is making this
>>>>>>>>>>>> halt
>>>>>>>>>>>> status decision.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And then it isn't, and so it NEVER was. UNSOUND LOGIC.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> X = "H is a pure simulator while it is making its halt status
>>>>>>>>>> decision"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are concluding that X is not true on the basis that X is true?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am says that the assertion that "H IS a pure simulator" is not
>>>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am saying that H is a pure simulator some of the time and you are
>>>>>>>> saying no I am wrong because H is not a pure simulator all of the
>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>> then it is not a pure simulator some of the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Something can't really be a pure simulator part of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure it can and in fact H is a pure simulator for the entire time that
>>>>>> it could otherwise possibly effect the behavior of its input. This
>>>>>> seems
>>>>>> to be beyond your capacity to understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, It can't. PERIOD.
>>>>>
>>>>> H can act like a pure simulator for the part of the trace that it runs,
>>>>> but H is NOT a pure simulator, at least as far as transformation rules
>>>>> for copies of it in the simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Every recursive invocation of H continues to act like a pure simulator
>>>> until after H makes it halt status decision.
>>>
>>> UNSOUND.
>>>
>>> Since H at some point will STOP being a pure simulator, its affect on
>>> the machine CALLING it is NOT the same as a Pure Simulator.
>>>
>>
>> While H does nothing to change the behavior of its input
>> H does do something that changes the behavior of its input.
>
> Not what I said.
>

It is what you implied.

> H does affect the machine that uses it.
>

H has no effect on the machine that it simulates until after its halt
status decision has been made. This conclusively proves that H can
ignore its in execution trace during its halt status analysis.

Anyone disagreeing with this is either not intelligent or knowledgeable
enough to understand it, or a liar.

That H does effect the behavior or its input at some other point is
utterly irrelevant to this analysis. We are only answering the single
question: Is it correct for H to ignore its own execution trace during
its halt status analysis?

> H0 does not affect the behavior of the machine that is represented by
> its input, P1.
>
> H1, which is used by P1, does affect the behavior of P1.
>
> If you want to try some stained logic to claim that No H affects the
> behavior of any P because an instance of P is used as an instance of H
> then you are using Unsound Logic.
>
> By the method of construction, the behavior of P is directly controlled
> by the behavior of H.
>
> To deny that is to say you are not following the pattern.
>
> FFFFFFFFFF AA IIIIIIIIII LL
> FF AA AA II LL
> FF AA AA II LL
> FFFFFF AAAAAAAAAA II LL
> FF AA AA II LL
> FF AA AA II LL
> FF AA AA IIIIIIIIII LLLLLLLLLL
>
>>
>> By this same reasoning all black cats are white.
>
> Nope. Strawman.
>
> UNSOUND LOGIC.
>
> Please try to actually PROVE something, you are just using rhetorical
> arguments that aren't actually very good.
>
>>
>>> You have a false premise in your logic so you have an UNSOUND argument.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This allows Every recursive invocation of H to totally ignore its own
>>>> execution in every halt status analysis execution trace.
>>>
>>> FALSE. Prove your claim. Really, Try to.
>>>
>>> UNSOUND.
>>>
>>> H may be able to ignore the affect of its own aborting on the behavior
>>> of the machine it is simulating, but it MUST take into account that same
>>> aborting behavior in the invocation of the copies of it the machine it
>>> is simulating, as that activity DOES affect those machines.
>>>
>>> Remember, The fact that H0 is aborting the simulation of P1 doesn't
>>> affect the real behavior of P1, thus we do need to look at what P1 would
>>> do if H0 didn't abort it, and from your run of P0, we know that after
>>> just a little bit more, H1 will also decide to abort its simulation of
>>> P2, and then return to P1 and then P1 will Halt.
>>>
>>> Thus, since the decision of H0 to abort doesn't affect the behavior of
>>> the machine that is its input, we see that P1 is STILL a Halting
>>> Computation, and that H1 will FAIL to be a Pure Simulation, so H0 is in
>>> error for treating it as one.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You confuse its affect on the input, which is a representation of a
>>>>> machine, which you are right it can't affect (not if it is an accurate
>>>>> simulator) for it having an affect on the machine it is imbedded in.
>>>>>
>>>>> If H is a pure simulator, the it CAN'T return an answer to the machine
>>>>> that 'called' it until the machine it is simulating has finished. Since
>>>>> it doesn't do that, it isn't a pure simulator, and thus the
>>>>> transformation of tracing the simulation of the simulator to the
>>>>> traceing of the machine it is simulationg isn't valid, as they are NOT
>>>>> equivalent.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem isn't the consideration of H0, the outer simulator
>>>>> (possibly
>>>>> being called by P0) but how you have to treat H1. Since the behavior of
>>>>> H1, even after it would have made its decision will affect the
>>>>> execution
>>>>> of P1, it can NOT be treated as a UTM, as it doesn't act like one.
>>>>>
>>>>> You logic is UNSOUND and FALSE. FAIL.
>>>>>
>>>>> H1's aborting affects P1's behavior (since that is its caller, not its
>>>>> input) so this means that even though H0's decision to abort can't
>>>>> affect P1's behavior, it does need to consider H1's behavior as not a
>>>>> pure simulatior.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact, your claimed rule, if you want to hold to it, means that
>>>>> switching H0 to a real UTM can't affect the behavior of P1, and we know
>>>>> that P(P) is halting, and thus UTM(P,P) is halting, so UTM(P1,P2) is
>>>>> halting (since all levels of P are the same), the we can show that the
>>>>> 'input' to H0 is a halting computation, it is just a fact that H0
>>>>> doesn't simulate it far enough to see that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H? [ key axiom ]

<TNOdnZcIEsSOiYD8nZ2dnUU7-XfNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19916&group=comp.theory#19916

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 09:07:15 -0500
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H? [ key axiom ]
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com>
<s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
<1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <7s6TI.39$KC1.15@fx33.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 09:07:13 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7s6TI.39$KC1.15@fx33.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <TNOdnZcIEsSOiYD8nZ2dnUU7-XfNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 87
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-o7OW9ZA4PPzyUpyuO/6ItoLhHXq/ZEPQ+kRpQrXJ5kpOSmBvJUZ86Z59pAdnCpwBC07iz8nDzZVlZIe!HrmvZ/c+qcdK45C9wY+lZB5mWCyzwddWKwL2vN9oxs+5yopL2cf4YpJU8A1lrhdeIlqhkitbcu8A!M0A=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5996
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:07 UTC

On 8/18/2021 6:48 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/18/21 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:
>
>> While H does nothing to change the behavior of its input
>> H does do something that changes the behavior of its input.
>>
>> By this same reasoning all black cats are white.
>>
> Thinking on this, I would like to point out a FUNDAMENTAL problem with
> all your arguments, you presume that if you come up with some pithy
> statement that sounds sort of true, you can just assume it to be true
> and move on from there.
>
> This is WRONG.
>
> Every statement, other than the fundamental axioms of the system, that
> everyone agrees to, needs to be proven, actually proven.
>
> You don't get to add new axioms to an existing system except with BROAD
> community support.
>

Sure I do. I can create any axioms that I want to as long as they can be
objectively verified as always consistently true under all conditions.

If some people are simply not bright enough to understand that they are
always necessarily consistently true then these people are simply
excluded from my target audience.

The key axiom that I created that my work depends upon is that
when-so-ever an input would never stop running while H remains in pure
simulation mode then the input is always correctly decided as never
halting.

This axiom derives the same correct results for all halting
computations, for the subset of infinite loops that H recognizes, for
the subset of infinite recursion that H recognizes and for the simple
halting problem counter-example programs that I have been providing.

The x86 code that I have provided consistently proves that this axiom is
correct.

> Fortunately, many things have already been proven, so we are allowed to
> rely on existing proofs, but to do that, it requires us to have actually
> studied the field to know what has been proven.
>
> Note, many times I have asked you if you can show someone else who has
> the same idea. I do this because it has been clear that YOU don't know
> how to even write a proper proof, so if you can't prove it, you need to
> rely on statements that others have proven.
>
> Maybe you haven't studied logic theory enough to know that rule, but
> that just says that you have fallen into the same trap that the ancient
> philosophers did until the worked out the actual rules of logic.
> Knowledge is built of actual PROOFS, not just fancy rhetorical
> arguments. There are many things that at first seem to be true, but when
> we examine them more closely we find that they are not.
>
> For instance, many will say that the next term in this sequence:
> 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 is obviously going to be 32, but in some problems the
> right answer is 31. This is the case of dividing a circle into areas
> with complete graphs
>
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividing_a_circle_into_areas)
>
> This sort of case shows that intuition and what the simple meaning of
> words is NOT sufficient to determine truth.
>
> Therefore, what you REALLY need to do to make your proof workable, is to
> look at your fundamental ideas that you base it on, go back to the field
> to see if someone else has actually proven that idea, and if so, look at
> the proof to refine what that idea actually means (your big problem is
> that many of your statements are mostly true, you just have a wrong
> slant in them).
>
> Learn what HAS been proven as a base. Then you can have things you can
> actually work with to use. The Fundamental are much harder to actually
> prove than later ideas, because you need to prove the fundamentals from
> just the barest of axioms.
>

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein

Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input to H?

<8c02cdd2-16b2-42f1-a312-e4813cb28fb7n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=19917&group=comp.theory#19917

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7d90:: with SMTP id c16mr8406719qtd.149.1629300523201;
Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:c752:: with SMTP id w79mr12224132ybe.348.1629300523087;
Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!usenet.pasdenom.info!usenet-fr.net!fdn.fr!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 08:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <Ee6dnb19NpQyjID8nZ2dnUU7-V3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23a8:400a:5601:3170:6d6f:89a8:3c41;
posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23a8:400a:5601:3170:6d6f:89a8:3c41
References: <3YOdnecvDsA5Q4r8nZ2dnUU7-TXNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<BqydnTi77c5Olob8nZ2dnUU7-TfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <qdESI.53526$M14.34426@fx11.iad>
<N9OdnZVmheHKhob8nZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@giganews.com> <s0FSI.19521$lK.19067@fx41.iad>
<a7idnTYs7dNmgob8nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ToMSI.25497$Thb4.14112@fx35.iad>
<2rSdnfB8eLnVRYb8nZ2dnUU7-b_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <LtXSI.32$tv2.30@fx45.iad>
<HMCdnaohdr_m2IH8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <ZMYSI.11$Oz2.8@fx47.iad>
<TdqdnUhYw5KvwYH8nZ2dnUU7-ffNnZ2d@giganews.com> <EcZSI.233$kr4.37@fx48.iad>
<XNudnXSIDcuj_IH8nZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <utZSI.8$LV.5@fx05.iad>
<B_udnbM9Dd6R-IH8nZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <mGZSI.5$S25.3@fx11.iad>
<s8GdnVpbercE94H8nZ2dnUU7-d3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Fm_SI.15$Oz2.13@fx47.iad>
<8sGdndqWyfAU6IH8nZ2dnUU7-dPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <MS_SI.222$Nc1.145@fx34.iad>
<QrOdnYXCAMdJ5oH8nZ2dnUU7-W3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <Jf%SI.430$Uc5.280@fx44.iad>
<1amdnQKZhuSXFYH8nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <Af5TI.23$Oz2.6@fx47.iad> <Ee6dnb19NpQyjID8nZ2dnUU7-V3NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <8c02cdd2-16b2-42f1-a312-e4813cb28fb7n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: How do we know H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for the input
to H?
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 15:28:43 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: Malcolm McLean - Wed, 18 Aug 2021 15:28 UTC

On Wednesday, 18 August 2021 at 14:57:10 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>
> H has no effect on the machine that it simulates until after its halt
> status decision has been made. This conclusively proves that H can
> ignore its in execution trace during its halt status analysis.
>
> Anyone disagreeing with this is either not intelligent or knowledgeable
> enough to understand it, or a liar.
>
> That H does effect the behavior or its input at some other point is
> utterly irrelevant to this analysis. We are only answering the single
> question: Is it correct for H to ignore its own execution trace during
> its halt status analysis?
>
If H is analysing H, it can't ignore the behaviour of H. That's why your results
are wrong despite the execution trace seeming to show a non-halting
behaviour.

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor