Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Calm down, it's *____only* ones and zeroes.

devel / comp.theory / Re: Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct

SubjectAuthor
* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
+* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctMalcolm McLean
|`* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
| `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctBen Bacarisse
|  `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
|   `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctAndré G. Isaak
|    `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
|     `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctAndré G. Isaak
|      `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
|       `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctBen Bacarisse
|        `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
|         `- Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctRichard Damon
+* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctAndré G. Isaak
|`* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
| +* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctChris M. Thomasson
| |`* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
| | `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctChris M. Thomasson
| |  `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
| |   `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctChris M. Thomasson
| |    `- Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctolcott
| `* Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctAndré G. Isaak
|  +- Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctJeff Barnett
|  `* _Airtight_proof_that_H(P,P)==0_is_correct_[_deficiency_of_André's_reasoning_]olcott
|   `* _Airtight_proof_that_H(P,P)==0_is_correct_André G. Isaak
|    `* _Airtight_proof_that_H(P,P)==0_is_correct_[_deficiency_of_André's_reasoning_]olcott
|     `- _Airtight_proof_that_H(P,P)==0_is_correct_Richard Damon
`- Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correctRichard Damon

Pages:12
Re: Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct

<Q9KdnZFSaJtdrLP8nZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=20471&group=comp.theory#20471

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!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, 31 Aug 2021 08:42:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <WaSdnZLVNdE-cbH8nZ2dnUU7-RvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9f9f7436-d66d-4136-8c33-3a96f148fff1n@googlegroups.com>
<mtWdndX2vNmbkrD8nZ2dnUU7-dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871r6a5otx.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<hOqdnQ2eNY9-CrD8nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sgk5pg$9o0$1@dont-email.me>
<4K6dnaCCasmfArD8nZ2dnUU7-b3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sgk74g$fe9$1@dont-email.me>
<ovednVh4qaDvPbD8nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0k23psj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 08:42:23 -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: <87k0k23psj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <Q9KdnZFSaJtdrLP8nZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 73
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-uR9yYNZmdKuBz4Txm+HMOCP5wplg35Jgs/BeBhV0N1/51bayUawrG3qA4/yw4k5mF9ds/RvB8B9sIVm!MGfLJhMZz684qNNj8y/mk0gO46kImqp6zJob+XwM4zZnlIflHyi2TNnRUtf/qO5z+WibeMhe65wE!cS8=
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: 4584
 by: olcott - Tue, 31 Aug 2021 13:42 UTC

On 8/31/2021 4:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 8/30/2021 10:19 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>> On 2021-08-30 21:16, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/30/2021 9:56 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>
>>>>> Again, what are "these two premises"?
>>>>
>>>> See that you haven't been paying any attention all along. They are
>>>> in the original thread. They have been rewritten on page 4 of my
>>>> paper:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351947980_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation
>>>
>>> Nowhere on page 4 are two premises listed.
>>> André
>>
>> Follow the reasoning and then reverse engineer what the premises are.
>
> Classic! Have we reached "peak crank" yet? Let's hope so...
>
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:c36
[00000c36][002117ca][002117ce] 55 push ebp
[00000c37][002117ca][002117ce] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00000c39][002117ca][002117ce] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00000c3c][002117c6][00000c36] 50 push eax // push P
[00000c3d][002117c6][00000c36] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00000c40][002117c2][00000c36] 51 push ecx // push P
[00000c41][002117be][00000c46] e820fdffff call 00000966 // call H(P,P)

[00000c36][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 55 push ebp
[00000c37][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00000c39][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00000c3c][0025c1ee][00000c36] 50 push eax // push P
[00000c3d][0025c1ee][00000c36] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00000c40][0025c1ea][00000c36] 51 push ecx // push P
[00000c41][0025c1e6][00000c46] e820fdffff call 00000966 // call H(P,P)
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

PREMISE ONE
The infinite recursion detection criteria are met by the above execution
trace:
(a) P calls H twice in sequence from the same machine address.
(b) With the same parameters: (P,P) to H.
(c) With no conditional branch or indexed jump instructions in the
execution trace of P.
(d) We know that there are no return instructions in H because we know
that H is in pure simulation mode.

This conclusively proves that P never halts unless H aborts its
simulation of P which proves that the behavior of the simulation of P on
input P by H meets the following criteria:

PREMISE TWO
Simulating Halt Decider Theorem (Olcott 2020):
A simulating halt decider correctly decides that any input that never
halts unless the simulating halt decider aborts its simulation of this
input is an input that never halts.

{H(P,P)==0 is correct} is necessitated by PREMISE ONE and PREMISE TWO
and both premsies are true.

When X is logically necessitated by Y and Z and Y and Z are true then we
know that X is true and nothing else in the universe can contradict this.

--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct

<9hyXI.15307$md6.14330@fx36.iad>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=20495&group=comp.theory#20495

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx36.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Airtight proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <WaSdnZLVNdE-cbH8nZ2dnUU7-RvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9f9f7436-d66d-4136-8c33-3a96f148fff1n@googlegroups.com>
<mtWdndX2vNmbkrD8nZ2dnUU7-dfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871r6a5otx.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<hOqdnQ2eNY9-CrD8nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sgk5pg$9o0$1@dont-email.me>
<4K6dnaCCasmfArD8nZ2dnUU7-b3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sgk74g$fe9$1@dont-email.me>
<ovednVh4qaDvPbD8nZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0k23psj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Q9KdnZFSaJtdrLP8nZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Q9KdnZFSaJtdrLP8nZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <9hyXI.15307$md6.14330@fx36.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, 31 Aug 2021 18:44:21 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5076
 by: Richard Damon - Tue, 31 Aug 2021 22:44 UTC

On 8/31/21 9:42 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/31/2021 4:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 8/30/2021 10:19 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>> On 2021-08-30 21:16, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/30/2021 9:56 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Again, what are "these two premises"?
>>>>>
>>>>> See that you haven't been paying any attention all along. They are
>>>>> in the original thread. They have been rewritten on page 4 of my
>>>>> paper:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351947980_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nowhere on page 4 are two premises listed.
>>>> André
>>>
>>> Follow the reasoning and then reverse engineer what the premises are.
>>
>> Classic!  Have we reached "peak crank" yet?  Let's hope so...
>>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:c36
> [00000c36][002117ca][002117ce] 55          push ebp
> [00000c37][002117ca][002117ce] 8bec        mov ebp,esp
> [00000c39][002117ca][002117ce] 8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00000c3c][002117c6][00000c36] 50          push eax       // push P
> [00000c3d][002117c6][00000c36] 8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00000c40][002117c2][00000c36] 51          push ecx       // push P
> [00000c41][002117be][00000c46] e820fdffff  call 00000966  // call H(P,P)
>
> [00000c36][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 55          push ebp
> [00000c37][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 8bec        mov ebp,esp
> [00000c39][0025c1f2][0025c1f6] 8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00000c3c][0025c1ee][00000c36] 50          push eax       // push P
> [00000c3d][0025c1ee][00000c36] 8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00000c40][0025c1ea][00000c36] 51          push ecx       // push P
> [00000c41][0025c1e6][00000c46] e820fdffff  call 00000966  // call H(P,P)
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> PREMISE ONE
> The infinite recursion detection criteria are met by the above execution
> trace:
> (a) P calls H twice in sequence from the same machine address.
> (b) With the same parameters: (P,P) to H.
> (c) With no conditional branch or indexed jump instructions in the
> execution trace of P.

Because the trace is incorrect and presumes that H will NEVER abort its
simulation

UNSOUND LOGIC.

> (d) We know that there are no return instructions in H because we know
> that H is in pure simulation mode.

BUT, it WILL leave that mode if allowed to continue.

UNSOUND LOGIC.

Either your logic is unsound as pointed out above, or this H REALLY IS a
PURE SIMULATOR, and since the top level H isn't, H is proved to not be a
Computation per the official definition, and thus not eligable to be a
decider.

FAIL.

>
> This conclusively proves that P never halts unless H aborts its
> simulation of P which proves that the behavior of the simulation of P on
> input P by H meets the following criteria:
>

UNSOUND.

FALSE

> PREMISE TWO
> Simulating Halt Decider Theorem (Olcott 2020):
> A simulating halt decider correctly decides that any input that never
> halts unless the simulating halt decider aborts its simulation of this
> input is an input that never halts.

UNPROVEN, UNSOUND. FALSE.

>
> {H(P,P)==0 is correct} is necessitated by PREMISE ONE and PREMISE TWO
> and both premsies are true.
>

UNSOUND, FALSE.

> When X is logically necessitated by Y and Z and Y and Z are true then we
> know that X is true and nothing else in the universe can contradict this.
>
>
>

Since NEITHER Y or Z are proved correct, you logic is UNSOUND.

FAIL.

Pages:12
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor