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

Groups > comp.theory > #107441

Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES

From olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.theory
Subject Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES
Date 2024-06-19 10:46 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <v4uugg$21os1$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (9 earlier) <v4u33c$1rrod$1@dont-email.me> <v4ukld$1vpm0$1@dont-email.me> <v4unf7$1vtc8$1@dont-email.me> <v4urgp$21810$1@dont-email.me> <v4uu3k$1vtc8$4@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/19/2024 10:39 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 19.jun.2024 om 16:55 schreef olcott:
>> On 6/19/2024 8:46 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 19.jun.2024 om 14:58 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/19/2024 2:58 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 18.jun.2024 om 21:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 11:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-06-18 12:57:21 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-17 13:03:56 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/17/2024 2:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-16 12:47:09 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/16/2024 2:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-15 16:22:09 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > On 6/13/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how H computes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> the mapping from the x86 machine language finite 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> string input to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> H(D,D) using the finite string transformation rules 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specified by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> the semantics of the x86 programming language that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reaches the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> behavior of the directly executed D(D)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > Why? I don't claim it can.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The first six steps of this mapping are when instructions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at the machine address range of [00000cfc] to [00000d06]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are simulated/executed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After that the behavior of D correctly simulated by H 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> diverges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the behavior of D(D) because the call to H(D,D) by D
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly simulated by H cannot possibly return to D.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _D()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000cfc](01) 55          push ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000cfd](02) 8bec        mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000cff](03) 8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d02](01) 50          push eax       ; push D
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d03](03) 8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d06](01) 51          push ecx       ; push D
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d07](05) e800feffff  call 00000b0c  ; call H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d0c](03) 83c408      add esp,+08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d0f](02) 85c0        test eax,eax
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d11](02) 7404        jz 00000d17
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d13](02) 33c0        xor eax,eax
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d15](02) eb05        jmp 00000d1c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d17](05) b801000000  mov eax,00000001
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d1c](01) 5d          pop ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00000d1d](01) c3          ret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0034) [00000d1d]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When you put "V2" or "V3" or something similar on the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you should tell what is different from the original version.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I ask what are the steps
>>>>>>>>>>>> I provide 6 steps and then ask what are the next steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I provide all of the steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *This is the simplest possible version*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>    H0(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> After six steps of DDD are correctly emulated by H0
>>>>>>>>>> what machine address of DDD would it be at?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fd2] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fd3] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fd5] 68d21f0000       push 00001fd2 ; push DDD
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fda] e8f3f9ffff       call 000019d2 ; call H0
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fdf] 83c404           add esp,+04   ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fe2] 5d               pop ebp       ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>> [00001fe3] c3               ret           ; return to caller
>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00001fe3]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So how is this a difference between the original version and V2 
>>>>>>>>> and V3?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No params thus easier to see that it pushes its own machine 
>>>>>>>> address.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My question is still unanswered.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The simplest possible case*
>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    H0(DDD);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The next simplest case*
>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>> void DDD(ptr x)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    HH(x, x);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The conventional case*
>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr2)();
>>>>>> int P(ptr2 x)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had to keep dumbing it down to make it more
>>>>>> difficult to reject out-of-hand without review.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, this is not the simplest case. You are making it unnecessary 
>>>>> complex. The simplest case is:
>>>>>
>>>>>         int main()
>>>>>         {
>>>>>           return H(main, 0);
>>>>>         }
>>>>>
>>>>> No D, DD, or DDD is needed.
>>>>> For this case you proved that main halts, whereas H reports 
>>>>> non-halting, i.e. a false negative.
>>>>> This shows that in your more complex (but equivalent) cases there 
>>>>> is also a false negative.
>>>>> Of course, you prefer the more complex cases, because there you can 
>>>>> play your invalid claim that the direct execution and the 
>>>>> simulation of DDD(DDD) show different behaviour., but the simplest 
>>>>> case shows that it is not true. It is just a false negative.
>>>>
>>>> _DDD()
>>>> [000020a2] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>> [000020a3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>> [000020a5] 68a2200000 push 000020a2 ; push DDD
>>>> [000020aa] e8f3f9ffff call 00001aa2 ; call H0
>>>> [000020af] 83c404     add esp,+04   ; housekeeping
>>>> [000020b2] 5d         pop ebp       ; housekeeping
>>>> [000020b3] c3         ret           ; never gets here
>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000020b3]
>>>>
>>>> Exactly which step of DDD emulated by H0 was emulated
>>>> incorrectly such that this emulation would be complete?
>>>> AKA DDD emulated by H0 reaches machine address [000020b3]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That has been pointed out to you so many times. 
>>
>> When falsehoods are pointed out an unlimited number of times
>> they still remain falsehoods.
>>
>>> It seems really to difficult for you. So, you prefer to forget or 
>>> ignore it.
>>> The 'call' instruction at 000020aa is incorrectly simulated. 
>>
>> As a matter of fact it is not incorrectly simulated.
>> I am showing this with HH0 instead of H0 because
>> the trace provided by HH0 is easier to understand.
>>
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HH0(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>    HH0(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> _DDD()
>> [00002093] 55         push ebp
>> [00002094] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>> [00002096] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
>> [0000209b] e853f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
>> [000020a0] 83c404     add esp,+04
>> [000020a3] 5d         pop ebp
>> [000020a4] c3         ret
>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000020a4]
>>
>> _main()
>> [000020b3] 55         push ebp
>> [000020b4] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>> [000020b6] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
>> [000020bb] e833f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
>> [000020c0] 83c404     add esp,+04
>> [000020c3] eb04       jmp 000020c9
>> [000020c5] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>> [000020c7] eb02       jmp 000020cb
>> [000020c9] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>> [000020cb] 5d         pop ebp
>> [000020cc] c3         ret
>> Size in bytes:(0026) [000020cc]
>>
>>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>>   address   address   data      code       language
>>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
>> [000020b3][00103680][00000000] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
>> [000020b4][00103680][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>> [000020b6][0010367c][00002093] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
>> [000020bb][00103678][000020c0] e833f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
>> New slave_stack at:103724
>>
>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:11372c
>> [00002093][0011371c][00113720] 55         push ebp      ; begin DDD
>> [00002094][0011371c][00113720] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>> [00002096][00113718][00002093] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
>> [0000209b][00113714][000020a0] e853f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
>> New slave_stack at:14e14c
>> [00002093][0015e144][0015e148] 55         push ebp      ; begin DDD
>> [00002094][0015e144][0015e148] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>> [00002096][0015e140][00002093] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
>> [0000209b][0015e13c][000020a0] e853f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>
>> [000020c0][00103680][00000000] 83c404     add esp,+04   ; return to main
>> [000020c3][00103680][00000000] eb04       jmp 000020c9
>> [000020c9][00103680][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
>> [000020cb][00103684][00000018] 5d         pop ebp
>> [000020cc][00103688][00000000] c3         ret           ; end main
>> Number of Instructions Executed(10067) == 150 Pages
>>
>>
>>> H0 is required to halt, i.e. to return, but your simulation does not 
>>> show the 'ret' instruction of H0.
>>
>> Yes it does not show this yet HH0 does simulate itself simulating DDD.
>>
>> If the eight lines of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 were mixed in
>> with the 150 pages of HH0 simulating itself it would be too difficult
>> to see the behavior of DDD. The reader would have to carefully search
>> for the machine addresses of DDD that only occur every 19 pages.
>>
>> I will adapt HH0 so that it does show HH0 simulating itself
>> simulating DDD.
>>
>>> It seems you are so confused that you do not understand it. 
>>> Therefore, you think it is a change of subject or gibberish. Showing 
>>> that it is over your head.
>>> Instead of fixing the problem, you just repeat the claim without any 
>>> new argument.
>>> The simulation fails, because it is aborted one cycle too soon, 
>>> before the simulated H0 would reach its 'ret' instruction. A correct 
>>> simulation would see this. Unfortunately, H0 is unable to correctly 
>>> simulate itself.
>>
>> Because the executed HH0 always has at least one more execution trace
>> than any of its simulated instances unless it aborts the simulation
>> after a fixed number of repeating states, none of them do.
> 
> What is your problem:
> 1) You say: 'HH0 always has at least one more execution trace than any 
> of its simulated instances'. That is correct. That is true even if it 
> does abort. Is that over your head?
> 2) If it aborts, it misses the fact that the simulation of itself would 
> also abort one execution trace later. Is that over your head?
> 3) If it misses the fact that its simulation of itself would halt one 
> execution trace later, it is incorrect to report non-halting. Is that 
> over your head?
> 
> What is your problem: 1, 2, or 3.
> If you do not even understand it, you better stop talking about it.

*THIS IS SIMPLY OVER YOUR HEAD*
*THIS IS SIMPLY OVER YOUR HEAD*
*THIS IS SIMPLY OVER YOUR HEAD*

typedef void (*ptr)();
int H0(ptr P);

void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
}

void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
}

void DDD()
{
   H0(DDD);
}

int main()
{
   H0(Infinite_Loop);
   H0(Infinite_Recursion);
   H0(DDD);
}

Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows that when
H0 emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop, Infinite_Recursion,
and DDD that it must abort these emulations so that itself can terminate
normally.

Every C programmer has agreed thus you simply don't know these things
well enough.

-- 
Copyright 2024 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

Thread

H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 11:22 -0500
  Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 12:33 -0400
    Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 16:56 -0500
      Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 19:01 -0400
        Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 18:30 -0500
          Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 19:37 -0400
            Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 19:05 -0500
              Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 20:13 -0400
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 19:48 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 21:19 -0400
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-15 20:42 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-15 21:58 -0400
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-16 11:00 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-16 07:48 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-16 13:30 -0400
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-17 10:19 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 07:57 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-18 11:01 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 07:48 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-18 19:04 +0300
  Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-16 10:53 +0300
    Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-16 07:47 -0500
      Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-16 13:30 -0400
      Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-17 10:20 +0300
        Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-17 08:03 -0500
          Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-17 18:46 -0400
          Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-18 11:03 +0300
            Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 07:57 -0500
              Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-18 19:05 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 13:55 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-19 11:36 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 08:44 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-20 08:05 +0300
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-20 00:19 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-18 14:04 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-19 09:58 +0200
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 07:58 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-19 15:46 +0200
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 09:55 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-19 17:39 +0200
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 10:46 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2024-06-19 16:29 +0000
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-19 12:07 -0500
                Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-06-20 09:53 +0200

csiph-web