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

Groups > comp.theory > #58845

Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/16/22 9:41 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/16/2022 10:16 AM, olcott wrote:
>> <Sipser approved abstract>
>> MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following verbatim 
>> paragraph is correct (he has not agreed to anything else in this paper):
>>
>> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D until H 
>> correctly determines that its simulated D would never stop running 
>> unless aborted then H can abort its simulation of D and correctly 
>> report that D specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>> </Sipser approved abstract>
>>
>> to this paper:
>>
>> *Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof*
>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364302709_Rebutting_the_Sipser_Halting_Problem_Proof
>>
>> The proof that the simulation of D by H is correct and that this 
>> correctly simulated D would never stop running unless aborted is on 
>> page 3 of the above paper. People that fail to comprehend the 
>> technical details of page 3 are unqualified to assess the correctness 
>> of page 3.
>>
>> The technical prerequisites for page 3 are expert knowledge of the C 
>> programming language, knowledge of x86 assembly language and how the C 
>> calling conventions are implemented in x86 assembly language.
>>
>> Page 4 shows the application of a simulating halt decider to the Peter 
>> Linz proof proving that the "impossible" input ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ to the embedded 
>> copy of Linz H contained within Linz Ĥ is correctly construed as 
>> specifying non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>
> 
> Sipser_H: Begin Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:111fa8
>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>   address   address   data      code       language
>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> [000012ae][00111f94][00111f98] 55         push ebp     // Begin Sipser_D
> [000012af][00111f94][00111f98] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000012b1][00111f94][00111f98] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [000012b4][00111f90][000012ae] 50         push eax      // push Sipser_D
> [000012b5][00111f90][000012ae] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [000012b8][00111f8c][000012ae] 51         push ecx      // push Sipser_D
> [000012b9][00111f88][000012be] e880fdffff call 0000103e // call Sipser_H
> Sipser_H: Infinitely Recursive Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped
> 
> // Richard is too dumb to see this
> If (H never stops D)
>     D keeps repeating
> 
> 
> 
But that isn't the question, and H DOES stop, so it doesn't matter.

Just proves you have been lying about actually working on the Halting 
Problem.

You are just proving your stupidity.

Please show a credible reference for you criteria, failure is evidence 
that you are just making it up.

YOU HAVE FAILED.

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 10:16 -0500
  Re: MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-10-16 16:37 +0100
    Re: MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-16 10:44 -0500
  Re: MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 12:58 -0400
    Re: MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 12:15 -0500
      Re: MIT Professor Michael Sipser validates the notion of a simulating halt decider V2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 13:54 -0400
  Re: Richard does not have a clue olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 20:29 -0500
    Re: Richard does not have a clue olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-16 20:36 -0500
      Re: No one is dumber than Richard olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 20:37 -0500
      Re: Peter Olcott does not have a clue Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 21:50 -0400
        Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 20:53 -0500
          Re: Peter Olcot is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 22:13 -0400
    Re: Peter Olcott does not have a clue Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 21:48 -0400
  Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 20:41 -0500
    Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 21:51 -0400
      Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 20:55 -0500
        Re: Peter Olcott is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 22:11 -0400
          Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 21:31 -0500
            Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-16 22:50 -0400
              Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-10-16 22:18 -0500
                Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-17 07:02 -0400
                Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-10-17 09:50 -0500
                Re: Richard is as dumb as dumb gets Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-10-17 18:39 -0400

csiph-web