On 8/13/2021 3:58 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 16:50:19 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/12/2021 10:40 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 13:24:46 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/12/2021 3:36 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, 12 August 2021 at 06:11:30 UTC+1, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/11/2021 5:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/11/2021 6:32 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2021 5:04 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> PROOF THAT M REFERS TO THE TURING MACHINE DESCRIPTION PARAMETER WM TO H
>>>>>>>>>> PROOF THAT M REFERS TO THE TURING MACHINE DESCRIPTION PARAMETER WM TO H
>>>>>>>>>> PROOF THAT M REFERS TO THE TURING MACHINE DESCRIPTION PARAMETER WM TO H
>>>>>>>>>> PROOF THAT M REFERS TO THE TURING MACHINE DESCRIPTION PARAMETER WM TO H
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I see you are in "paste the same text" again mode. If you think I can
>>>>>>>>> help in any way, do let me know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's not nice. Aren't you afraid that he'll develop carpal tunnel
>>>>>>>> syndrome? That along with all of his other deficiencies will surely do
>>>>>>>> him in. Perhaps we can invent shortcuts a la LaTeX macros and font
>>>>>>>> switches to help him cut down the strain. He wont be insulted and will
>>>>>>>> take to it as a pig to mud. Just think, he'll have yet another
>>>>>>>> notation to misuse and abuse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben finally acknowledged the point that I was making:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // M refers to the TM of the first wM parameter to Ĥ.qx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My proof requires a whole inference chain that cannot proceed to the
>>>>>>> next point until the current point is accepted as correct.
>>>>>> In addition to carpal tunnel, you are delusional. I get the vague
>>>>>> impression reading the above that you are having a schizoid episode.
>>>>>> There is a complete and total discount between what others say to you
>>>>>> and your replies. I suggest you cut out some of the examples you like
>>>>>> best and show them to your therapist. You do have one, don't you? It may
>>>>>> lead to better, more effective treatment. We are all hoping you get
>>>>>> better but schizoid episodes are hard to suppress. I assume meds have
>>>>>> been prescribed for your condition. Are you taking them? Or are you
>>>>>> refusing medical help just as you refuse to allow Ben to heal your
>>>>>> ignorance. A little trust in your betters will go a long way towards
>>>>>> recovery and a cure. Start now before it's to late. God speed to you.
>>>>>> -
>>>>> YOu might be right, but I think it's just frustration. His execution trace shows
>>>>> what appears to be an infinitely recursive process aborted, and everyone is
>>>>> just ignoring that and focusing on the other reality that his H does not
>>>>> return the result that matches the behaviour of the input when run independently.
>>>>>
>>>>> The attempt to use formal math notation when he doesn't understand it
>>>>> doesn't help. That can create the impression of mental incoherence, but in fact
>>>>> it's not that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Despite a mass of posting, we still don't have a good idea how H works.
>>>> _P()
>>>> [00000d02](01) 55 push ebp
>>>> [00000d03](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00000d05](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d08](01) 50 push eax // push 2nd Param
>>>> [00000d09](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d0c](01) 51 push ecx // push 1st Param
>>>> [00000d0d](05) e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
>>>> [00000d12](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
>>>> [00000d15](02) 85c0 test eax,eax
>>>> [00000d17](02) 7402 jz 00000d1b
>>>> [00000d19](02) ebfe jmp 00000d19
>>>> [00000d1b](01) 5d pop ebp
>>>> [00000d1c](01) c3 ret
>>>> Size in bytes:(0027) [00000d1c]
>>>> machine stack stack machine assembly
>>>> address address data code language
>>>> ======== ======== ======== ========= =============
>>>> ...[00000d0d][00101829][00000d12] e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
>>>>
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:d02
>>>> ...[00000d02][002118f1][002118f5] 55 push ebp
>>>> ...[00000d03][002118f1][002118f5] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>> ...[00000d05][002118f1][002118f5] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[00000d08][002118ed][00000d02] 50 push eax // push P
>>>> ...[00000d09][002118ed][00000d02] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[00000d0c][002118e9][00000d02] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>> ...[00000d0d][002118e5][00000d12] e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
>>>>
>>>> ...[00000d02][0025c319][0025c31d] 55 push ebp
>>>> ...[00000d03][0025c319][0025c31d] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>> ...[00000d05][0025c319][0025c31d] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[00000d08][0025c315][00000d02] 50 push eax // push P
>>>> ...[00000d09][0025c315][00000d02] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[00000d0c][0025c311][00000d02] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>> ...[00000d0d][0025c30d][00000d12] e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
>>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>> If this means that you are telling me that:
>>>> (1) You know the x86 language very well.
>>>>
>>>> (2) Can't begin to understand why P would be stuck in infinitely nested
>>>> simulation while H acts as a pure simulator?
>>>>
>>> OK, so let's start.
>>> There's a line which says "Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine
>>> Address:d02". Is that part of the execution trace, or is it a commented added
>>> by hand? If it is part of the execution trace, why doesn't this line appear
>>> before the second line with the label 0d02?
>> The halt decider automatically writes this when it begins the simulation
>> that its halt analysis is based on.
>>
> OK, so why don't we get a second "Begin Local Halt Decider ..." line output?

Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:d02
....[00000d02][002118f1][002118f5] 55 push ebp
....[00000d03][002118f1][002118f5] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00000d05][002118f1][002118f5] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00000d08][002118ed][00000d02] 50 push eax // push P
....[00000d09][002118ed][00000d02] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[00000d0c][002118e9][00000d02] 51 push ecx // push P
....[00000d0d][002118e5][00000d12] e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
....[00000d02][0025c319][0025c31d] 55 push ebp
....[00000d03][0025c319][0025c31d] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00000d05][0025c319][0025c31d] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00000d08][0025c315][00000d02] 50 push eax // push P
....[00000d09][0025c315][00000d02] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[00000d0c][0025c311][00000d02] 51 push ecx // push P
....[00000d0d][0025c30d][00000d12] e870feffff call 00000b82 // call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

The simulation of the input begins and continues until it ends.

>>>>
>>>> I would say that you must be a liar.
>>>>
>>> I have a PhD. PhD holder attach a very high value to honesty, in particular
>>> with respect to their subjects. But also more generally. I always draw attention
>>> if I'm given too much change at the pub, for example, not becaue I'm better
>>> than other people, but because I'm a doctor, and a doctor can't be seen to
>>> take money that doesn't belong to him.
>>>
>> So do (1) and (2) apply to you?
>>
> That was a demand for an apology, but you are too focused on your own
> interests to be sensitive to what other people are trying to communicate to you.
>