Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  nodelist  faq  login

lp1 on fire -- One of the more obfuscated kernel messages


computers / comp.ai.philosophy / Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power

SubjectAuthor
* All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic powerolcott
`* Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic powerolcott
 `* Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic powerolcott
  `- Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic powerolcott

1
Subject: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 14:49 UTC
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: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 09:49:52 -0500
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 09:49:51 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Content-Language: en-US
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Subject: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <9sudne4_G7qNj_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 98
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-zoq87pf9/hkCgBxOTRF1B3L6uZOjB2lmYZ1IGT659TqtpR1aLyGP4xW1X/w8/4vbnhrEJrJ83QyZn+K!4aasDHJ1K0Y7ZBkpSegjHsh4807bsLmMKPKJTIoqtDD5rDMWxhaKoK4oebywYyOeBRaLFu0tq+Ib
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: 5117
View all headers
All of my reviewers expect H(P,P) to compute the halt status of P(P), yet the behavior specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the behavior specified by P(P).

Anyone that is an expert in the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C translates into x86 and what an x86 processor emulator is can easily verify that the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) by H specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.

Since my reviewers expect the halt decider to compute the halt status of P(P) yet the input to H(P,P) specifies a different halt status my reviewers expect H to read their mind so that it can compute different behavior than the behavior that the input actually specifies.



The function named H continues to simulate its input using an x86 emulator until this input either halts on its own or H detects that it would never halt. If its input halts H returns 1. If H detects that its input would never halt H returns 0.

#include <stdint.h>
#define u32 uint32_t

void P(u32 x)
{
   if (H(x, x))
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}

int main()
{
   Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
}

_P()
[000009d6](01) 55         push ebp
[000009d7](02) 8bec       mov ebp,esp
[000009d9](03) 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
[000009dc](01) 50         push eax         // push P
[000009dd](03) 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[000009e0](01) 51         push ecx         // push P
[000009e1](05) e840feffff call 00000826    // call H
[000009e6](03) 83c408     add esp,+08
[000009e9](02) 85c0       test eax,eax
[000009eb](02) 7402       jz 000009ef
[000009ed](02) ebfe       jmp 000009ed
[000009ef](01) 5d         pop ebp
[000009f0](01) c3         ret              // Final state
Size in bytes:(0027) [000009f0]

The simulated input to H(P,P) cannot possibly reach its own final state of [000009f0] it keeps repeating [000009d6] to [000009e1] until aborted.

Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation

     machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
     address   address   data      code       language
     ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
....[000009d6][00211368][0021136c] 55         push ebp         // enter P
....[000009d7][00211368][0021136c] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
....[000009d9][00211368][0021136c] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[000009dc][00211364][000009d6] 50         push eax         // Push P
....[000009dd][00211364][000009d6] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[000009e0][00211360][000009d6] 51         push ecx         // Push P
....[000009e1][0021135c][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826    // Call H
....[000009d6][0025bd90][0025bd94] 55         push ebp         // enter P
....[000009d7][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
....[000009d9][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[000009dc][0025bd8c][000009d6] 50         push eax         // Push P
....[000009dd][0025bd8c][000009d6] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[000009e0][0025bd88][000009d6] 51         push ecx         // Push P
....[000009e1][0025bd84][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826    // Call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

Because the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) cannot possibly reach its own final state at [000009f0] it is necessarily correct for H to reject this input as non-halting.

The correctly simulated 27 bytes of machine code at [000009d6] would never reach its own final state at [000009f0] when correctly simulated by the simulating halt decider (SHD) at machine address [00000826].




Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5 --
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
  Genius hits a target no one else can see."
  Arthur Schopenhauer


Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.math, sci.logic
Followup: sci.logic
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:34 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4
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: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:34:48 -0500
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:34:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.math,sci.logic
References: <9sudne4_G7qNj_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<a9db8e82-955f-48d1-98c9-a4a529b64e56n@googlegroups.com>
<7emdnUtkBq8lvvn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ae21ba1f-e4e2-432b-a274-2d6319af57bdn@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: sci.logic
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <ae21ba1f-e4e2-432b-a274-2d6319af57bdn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <mfmdnYqt3Ys1t_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 50
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-6rUTwGQ+Y2re5h7KR25d5uDdDhBFPuPJFcSCnDOejsYqqOxfXGrFU7xLHbSB/N1B+BG/n+352WuxE6d!F5bAhyeUFh2mFNeYDhBsiAhaNGdZdsJ2vgnChqyI+hbfNthl5+r+5tKmYkYBhs57pEe98cUE+Vze
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: 3849
View all headers
On 4/23/2022 11:29 AM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:05:19 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 10:58 AM, wij wrote:
On Saturday, 23 April 2022 at 22:49:59 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
All of my reviewers expect H(P,P) to compute the halt status of P(P),
yet the behavior specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the
behavior specified by P(P).

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

If using this common concept, the halting decider H, when given an argument P
(or P P), is supposed to answer whether P(P) will halt or not. This is a very
simple, easy idea to understand even for teenager students.

When this very simple idea is very rigorously examined (as it is in my
paper) one sees that this requires the halt decider to be a mind reader
and compute the halt status other than the actual halt status specified
by its actual input.

Your wording/interpretations/paper change all the time. No idea what this new
excuse 'mind reader' might mean. As said, the Halting Problem is very simple
and intuitive.
H should be a decider that computes the actual halt status of P(P). P is the
H's actual argument input.
I expect you might try to find some bugs of those descriptions to rephrasing it
in your favor. But, what would be the point? What is the usefulness of POOP?

Yet when you carefully examine my paper:

Anyone that is an expert in the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C translates into x86 and what an x86 processor emulator is can easily verify that the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) by H specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.

Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5 Simply ignoring the verified facts is a ridiculously foolish was to form any actual rebuttal.


--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
  Genius hits a target no one else can see."
  Arthur Schopenhauer


Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:51 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6
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!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:51:53 -0500
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:51:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <9sudne4_G7qNj_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<a9db8e82-955f-48d1-98c9-a4a529b64e56n@googlegroups.com>
<7emdnUtkBq8lvvn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ae21ba1f-e4e2-432b-a274-2d6319af57bdn@googlegroups.com>
<mfmdnYqt3Ys1t_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<90544d3f-8d36-4d70-8951-45342b939a06n@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <90544d3f-8d36-4d70-8951-45342b939a06n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <JY2dndGxr5I0s_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 89
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-g1JGn3cEqrtNyCaIvCxBxmF3wjw01pcJdGP4cJe68AJ3AtwqwGwojzQxzU6ELXGRvJUDfc5DKNgo8U3!7yTqwkfpmbjZLkRZS9KJ7mmXB2O4HOadwVU4l0Iq20TwidiC267F5MWuZYU8jMJXCB0e1oSszOLR
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: 6177
View all headers
On 4/23/2022 11:43 AM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:34:55 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 11:29 AM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:05:19 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 10:58 AM, wij wrote:
On Saturday, 23 April 2022 at 22:49:59 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
All of my reviewers expect H(P,P) to compute the halt status of P(P),
yet the behavior specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the
behavior specified by P(P).

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

If using this common concept, the halting decider H, when given an argument P
(or P P), is supposed to answer whether P(P) will halt or not. This is a very
simple, easy idea to understand even for teenager students.

When this very simple idea is very rigorously examined (as it is in my
paper) one sees that this requires the halt decider to be a mind reader
and compute the halt status other than the actual halt status specified
by its actual input.

Your wording/interpretations/paper change all the time. No idea what this new
excuse 'mind reader' might mean. As said, the Halting Problem is very simple
and intuitive.
H should be a decider that computes the actual halt status of P(P). P is the
H's actual argument input.
I expect you might try to find some bugs of those descriptions to rephrasing it
in your favor. But, what would be the point? What is the usefulness of POOP?
Yet when you carefully examine my paper:
Anyone that is an expert in the C programming language, the x86
programming language, exactly how C translates into x86 and what an x86
processor emulator is can easily verify that the correctly simulated
input to H(P,P) by H specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5
Simply ignoring the verified facts is a ridiculously foolish was to form
any actual rebuttal.
-- Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

You already verified the fact that H(P,P) will be in an infinite recursive call
(thus, undecidable). Why you say H(P,P)==false (or true)?

You might make a wild guess like this if you make sure to hardly pay attention. When you actually pay close attention and carefully study my paper it is very easy to see that H sees the same infinitely repeating pattern that we see, thus can abort its simulation and reject its input.


Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation

     machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
     address   address   data      code       language
     ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
....[000009d6][00211368][0021136c] 55         push ebp         // enter P
....[000009d7][00211368][0021136c] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
....[000009d9][00211368][0021136c] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[000009dc][00211364][000009d6] 50         push eax         // Push P
....[000009dd][00211364][000009d6] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[000009e0][00211360][000009d6] 51         push ecx         // Push P
....[000009e1][0021135c][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826    // Call H
....[000009d6][0025bd90][0025bd94] 55         push ebp         // enter P
....[000009d7][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
....[000009d9][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[000009dc][0025bd8c][000009d6] 50         push eax         // Push P
....[000009dd][0025bd8c][000009d6] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[000009e0][0025bd88][000009d6] 51         push ecx         // Push P
....[000009e1][0025bd84][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826    // Call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped



Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5 --
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
  Genius hits a target no one else can see."
  Arthur Schopenhauer


Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, comp.lang.prolog
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 21:50 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
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: Sat, 07 May 2022 16:50:36 -0500
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 16:50:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: All my reviewers expect a halt decider to have psychic power
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,comp.lang.prolog
References: <9sudne4_G7qNj_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<a9db8e82-955f-48d1-98c9-a4a529b64e56n@googlegroups.com>
<7emdnUtkBq8lvvn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<ae21ba1f-e4e2-432b-a274-2d6319af57bdn@googlegroups.com>
<mfmdnYqt3Ys1t_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<90544d3f-8d36-4d70-8951-45342b939a06n@googlegroups.com>
<JY2dndGxr5I0s_n_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<5f5837f9-279a-4d02-8d54-18e604a8496an@googlegroups.com>
<3cWdnSN3ZITNqPn_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<97d83870-8f3c-4e54-918c-dac850abce3cn@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <97d83870-8f3c-4e54-918c-dac850abce3cn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <38SdnVilEOYxdOv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 122
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-wB04gB4NE3u6EqvxQeDdKqkx7vli+aueiPPvUdpyDEUzllQj/lbhk254cT8efh4lFmuURPcpneCgYP4!4Ut3tTXcdJj6a+Y9SDvqhF817UpZlcs0dUx6ho1yVaczU6eTle/YTAIAloHAmqWubLoYX6p3ty8=
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: 8285
View all headers
On 4/23/2022 12:29 PM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 01:20:23 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 12:15 PM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:52:00 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 11:43 AM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:34:55 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 11:29 AM, wij wrote:
On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 00:05:19 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
On 4/23/2022 10:58 AM, wij wrote:
On Saturday, 23 April 2022 at 22:49:59 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
All of my reviewers expect H(P,P) to compute the halt status of P(P),
yet the behavior specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the
behavior specified by P(P).

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

If using this common concept, the halting decider H, when given an argument P
(or P P), is supposed to answer whether P(P) will halt or not. This is a very
simple, easy idea to understand even for teenager students.

When this very simple idea is very rigorously examined (as it is in my
paper) one sees that this requires the halt decider to be a mind reader
and compute the halt status other than the actual halt status specified
by its actual input.

Your wording/interpretations/paper change all the time. No idea what this new
excuse 'mind reader' might mean. As said, the Halting Problem is very simple
and intuitive.
H should be a decider that computes the actual halt status of P(P). P is the
H's actual argument input.
I expect you might try to find some bugs of those descriptions to rephrasing it
in your favor. But, what would be the point? What is the usefulness of POOP?
Yet when you carefully examine my paper:
Anyone that is an expert in the C programming language, the x86
programming language, exactly how C translates into x86 and what an x86
processor emulator is can easily verify that the correctly simulated
input to H(P,P) by H specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5
Simply ignoring the verified facts is a ridiculously foolish was to form
any actual rebuttal.
-- Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

You already verified the fact that H(P,P) will be in an infinite recursive call
(thus, undecidable). Why you say H(P,P)==false (or true)?
You might make a wild guess like this if you make sure to hardly pay
attention. When you actually pay close attention and carefully study my
paper it is very easy to see that H sees the same infinitely repeating
pattern that we see, thus can abort its simulation and reject its input.
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation

machine stack stack machine assembly
address address data code language
======== ======== ======== ========= =============
...[000009d6][00211368][0021136c] 55 push ebp // enter P
...[000009d7][00211368][0021136c] 8bec mov ebp,esp
...[000009d9][00211368][0021136c] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
...[000009dc][00211364][000009d6] 50 push eax // Push P
...[000009dd][00211364][000009d6] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
...[000009e0][00211360][000009d6] 51 push ecx // Push P
...[000009e1][0021135c][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826 // Call H
...[000009d6][0025bd90][0025bd94] 55 push ebp // enter P
...[000009d7][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8bec mov ebp,esp
...[000009d9][0025bd90][0025bd94] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
...[000009dc][0025bd8c][000009d6] 50 push eax // Push P
...[000009dd][0025bd8c][000009d6] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
...[000009e0][0025bd88][000009d6] 51 push ecx // Push P
...[000009e1][0025bd84][000009e6] e840feffff call 00000826 // Call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5
-- Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

"Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped" means
your x86utm emulator has encountered an infinite recursive call.
This is referred to as "undecidable". This is the fact.
So you are saying that after H makes the correct halt status decision
that this correct halt status decision is impossible to make.

That is just like my example a smashing a Boston cream pie in your face
and while this pie drips from your face you deny that the pie exists.

Your H did not show 'correct decision' but 'unreachable' (exactly what the HP says).

This is like "0.999..." (or repeating decimal) problems: Infinite repeating
simply means INFINITE repeating. Please, respect what it is.

My H proves that H(P,P)== false
on the basis that H does correctly compute the mapping from its input parameters to its own final reject state on the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input parameters.

The details of this are shown here:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5

A bunch of goofy people here do not understand that this meets the definition of a correct halt decider.

They believe that H must compute a mapping from non-inputs. This is quite nuts because they already know that no decider can ever do this.



--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
  Genius hits a target no one else can see."
  Arthur Schopenhauer


1
rocksolid light 0.7.2
clearneti2ptor