Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #86882

Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 14:17:35 -0500
olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/12/2022 1:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:25:34 -0500
> > olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 10/12/2022 1:07 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:04:17 -0500
> >>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>> On 10/12/2022 12:52 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 12:38:31 -0500
> >>>>> olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> wrote:
> >>>>>         
> >>>>>> On 10/12/2022 12:24 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 10:08:20 -0500
> >>>>>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>            
> >>>>>>>> Professor Michael Sipser of MIT said that this verbatim
> >>>>>>>> paragraph looks correct:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>         If H does correctly determine that its correct
> >>>>>>>> simulation of D would never stop running unless aborted,
> >>>>>>>> would it be correct for H to abort this simulation and
> >>>>>>>> report that D specifies a non-halting sequence of
> >>>>>>>> configurations?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This validates the idea of a simulating halt decider
> >>>>>>>> referenced in this paper.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> *Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof*
> >>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364302709_Rebutting_the_Sipser_Halting_Problem_Proof
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Professor Sipser has not had the time to carefully review
> >>>>>>>> this paper presented to him.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> *The exact words posted above have been approved by Michael
> >>>>>>>> Sipser*  
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Whilst the paragraph you sent to Sipser is correct the crucial
> >>>>>>> detail that you are glossing over is that you do NOT perform a
> >>>>>>> correct simulation for all inputs:
> >>>>>>>            
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Complete halt deciding system (Visual Studio Project) Sipser
> >>>>>> version. (a) x86utm operating system
> >>>>>> (b) x86 emulator adapted from libx86emu to compile under
> >>>>>> Windows (c) Several halt deciders and their sample inputs
> >>>>>> contained within Halt7.c https://liarparadox.org/2022_10_08.zip
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Anyone with sufficient software engineering skill can easily
> >>>>>> verify that Sipser_D is correctly simulated by Sipser_H and
> >>>>>> that Sipser_D remains stuck in infinitely recursive simulation
> >>>>>> unless and until Sipser_H aborts its correct simulation of
> >>>>>> Sipser_D.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You chose to not fully address my reply by snipping the
> >>>>> important part so I will give you another chance:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whilst the paragraph you sent to Sipser is correct the crucial
> >>>>> detail that you are glossing over is that you do NOT perform a
> >>>>> correct simulation for all inputs:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> void Px(void (*x)())
> >>>>> {
> >>>>> 	(void) H(x, x);
> >>>>> 	return;
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The correct simulation of Px above is to simulate Px halting.
> >>>>>         
> >>>>
> >>>> Not at all. It must be a correct simulation of the actual input
> >>>> by the simulating halt decider.
> >>>>
> >>>> int main() { H(Px,Px); }
> >>>> (a) The executed H simulates Px that calls a simulated H
> >>>> (b) that simulates Px that calls a simulated H
> >>>> (c) that simulates Px that calls a simulated H ...  
> >>>
> >>> Yes indeed it must be a correct simulation and a correct
> >>> simulation of Px is to simulate Px halting.
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>      
> >>
> >> Sipser agreed that the correct simulation of Px by H is the correct
> >> measure of the behavior of Px.  
> > 
> > Of course he did but you don't do a correct simulation of Px: a
> > correct simulation of Px is to simulate Px halting as that is how Px
> > behaves.
> > 
> > /Flibble
> >   
> 
> A correct simulation of Px by H derives the execution trace that I 
> specified. Every line of the execution trace of the x86 emulation of
> Px by H precisely corresponds to exactly what the x86 source code of
> Px specifies.
> 
> void Px(void (*x)())
> {
>    (void) H(x, x);
>    return;
> }
> 
> int main()
> {
>    Output("Input_Halts = ", H(Px, Px));
> }
> 
> _Px()
> [00001256] 55             push ebp
> [00001257] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
> [00001259] 8b4508         mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [0000125c] 50             push eax      // push 2nd arg to H
> [0000125d] 8b4d08         mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00001260] 51             push ecx      // push 1st arg to H
> [00001261] e8b0fcffff     call 00000f16 // call H
> [00001266] 83c408         add esp,+08
> [00001269] 5d             pop ebp
> [0000126a] c3             ret
> Size in bytes:(0021) [0000126a]
> 
> H: Begin Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:111fcb
> Address_of_H:f16
> [00001256][00111fb7][00111fbb] 55             push ebp
> [00001257][00111fb7][00111fbb] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
> [00001259][00111fb7][00111fbb] 8b4508         mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [0000125c][00111fb3][00001256] 50             push eax      // push Px
> [0000125d][00111fb3][00001256] 8b4d08         mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00001260][00111faf][00001256] 51             push ecx      // push Px
> [00001261][00111fab][00001266] e8b0fcffff     call 00000f16 // call H
> H: Infinitely Recursive Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped
> 
> We can see that the execution trace of the first six instructions of
> Px exactly matches the x86 source-code of Px. We can also see that Px
> was about to call H(Px,Px) again and this would repeat the cycle of
> the first six instructions of Px.

There are various methods of simulating an input: you have chosen an
incorrect method of simulation; if we substitute your H for another H
which uses a correct method of simulation, Px will correctly halt.

An SHD which uses a correct method of simulation would be the Flibble
Signaling Halt Decider (TM).

/Flibble

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 10:08 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 11:48 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 12:04 -0500
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 18:24 +0100
    Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-12 12:38 -0500
      Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 18:52 +0100
        Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 13:04 -0500
          Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 19:07 +0100
            Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 13:25 -0500
              Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 19:30 +0100
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 14:17 -0500
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 20:26 +0100
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-12 14:32 -0500
                Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-12 20:50 +0100
  Re: Michael Sipser of MIT validates the notion of a simulating halt decider (Ben's support) olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-20 22:17 -0500
  Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-21 15:03 -0500
    Re: Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2022-10-22 05:19 -0700
      Re: Ben agrees that Sipser_H is correct according to its halt status criteria [Paul N Lies] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-22 14:20 -0500
      Paul N is a liar or does not bother to pay attention olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-22 17:10 -0500

csiph-web