Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, sci.logic, comp.ai.philosophy, comp.software-eng |
| Subject | Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem |
| Date | 2023-02-15 08:57 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <tsirsc$2tobe$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <tsham9$2lvan$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 2/14/2023 6:57 PM, olcott wrote:
> (a) If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D until H
> correctly determines that its simulated D could not possibly reach its
> own "return" statement in a finite number of simulated steps then:
>
> (b) H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>
> When it is understood that (b) is a necessary consequence of (a) and we
> can see that (a) has been met then we understand that H(D,D) has
> correctly determined the halt state of its input.
>
> 001 int D(int (*x)())
> 002 {
> 003 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> 004 if (Halt_Status)
> 005 HERE: goto HERE;
> 006 return Halt_Status;
> 007 }
> 008
> 009 int main()
> 010 {
> 011 Output("Input_Halts = ", H(D,D));
> 012 Output("Input_Halts = ", D(D));
> 013 }
>
> *Simulating halt deciders applied to the halting theorem*
> The above is fully operational code in the x86utm operating system.
>
> Because H correctly detects that D correctly simulated by H would
> continue to call H(D,D) never reaching its own "return" statement H
> aborts it simulation of D and returns 0 to main() on line 011.
>
> Because H correctly detects that D correctly simulated by H would
> continue to call H(D,D) never reaching its own "return" statement H
> aborts it simulation of D and returns 0 to the executed D on line 003.
>
> straw man
> An intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is
> easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
> https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/straw_man
>
> Every recent rebuttal uses the strawman deception to change the subject
> away from: { D correctly simulated by H } or denies that (b) is a
> necessary consequence of (a).
>
Simulating Halt decider H(D,D) computes the mapping from its inputs to
an accept or reject state based on the behavior of D correctly simulated
by H. H simulates D until H determines that D would never reach its own
"return" statement in any finite number of simulated steps.
All halt deciders are intended to correctly predict the behavior of non-
terminating inputs. No halt decider ever continues to simulate its
input after it has correctly detected a repeating state.
Halfwit morons can't seem to understand this. These incredibly stupid
people seem to believe that the only way to detect infinite behavior is
to continue to simulate the non-halting input forever.
People with a modicum of technical competence will understand that when
D calls H(D,D) to simulate itself again that this simulated D cannot
possibly reach its own "return" statement in any finite number of steps.
I have shown this in x86 assembly language so that it is perfectly
unambiguously clear yet even highly skilled people seemed to have
totally forgotten this lost art.
H: Begin Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:113109
Address_of_H:1562
[00001d12][001130f5][001130f9] 55 push ebp ; begin D
[00001d13][001130f5][001130f9] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001d15][001130f1][001030c5] 51 push ecx
[00001d16][001130f1][001030c5] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00001d19][001130ed][00001d12] 50 push eax ; push address of D
[00001d1a][001130ed][00001d12] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00001d1d][001130e9][00001d12] 51 push ecx ; push address of D
[00001d1e][001130e5][00001d23] e83ff8ffff call 00001562 ; call H
H: Infinitely Recursive Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped
We can see that the first seven instructions of D simulated by H
precisely match the first seven instructions of the x86 source-code of
D. This conclusively proves that these instructions were simulated
correctly.
Anyone sufficiently technically competent in the x86 programming
language will agree that the above execution trace of D simulated by H
shows that D will never reach its own "return" statement.
H detects that D is calling itself with the exact same arguments that H
was called with and there are no conditional branch instructions from
the beginning of D to its call to H that can possibly escape the
repetition of this recursive simulation.
>
> *Simulating Halt Decider Applied to the Halting Theorem*
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364657019_Simulating_Halt_Decider_Applied_to_the_Halting_Theorem
>
>
--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-14 18:57 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-14 21:03 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-14 21:39 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-14 23:51 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 08:57 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 18:57 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 13:25 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 15:12 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 16:12 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 19:22 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 19:20 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 16:13 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 20:22 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 21:36 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 20:39 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 21:55 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 21:15 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 22:20 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 21:28 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-15 22:42 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-16 10:59 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-16 18:43 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-16 13:16 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2023-02-16 12:26 -0700
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ irrefutable ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-16 13:41 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ irrefutable ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2023-02-16 15:24 -0700
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ irrefutable ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-16 16:45 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ irrefutable ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-16 18:48 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-16 18:45 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ Ben will not lie about this ] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-16 17:01 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [ Ben will not lie about this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-16 18:49 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 15:31 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-24 20:11 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 15:31 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-24 20:11 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 16:07 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-24 20:11 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 16:08 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-24 20:11 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [-ONLY LIARS WILL DISAGREE-] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-02-26 14:01 -0600
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [-ONLY LIARS WILL DISAGREE-] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-02-26 15:15 -0500
Re: Simulating halt deciders defeat the halting theorem [-ONLY LIARS WILL DISAGREE-] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2023-02-26 20:32 +0000
csiph-web