Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.szaf.org!news.karotte.org!news.space.net!news.muc.de!.POSTED.news.muc.de!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Followup-To: comp.theory Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:46:47 -0000 (UTC) Organization: muc.de e.V. Message-ID: References: Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:46:47 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news.muc.de; posting-host="news.muc.de:2001:608:1000::2"; logging-data="70308"; mail-complaints-to="news-admin@muc.de" User-Agent: tin/2.6.3-20231224 ("Banff") (FreeBSD/14.0-RELEASE-p5 (amd64)) Bytes: 2554 Lines: 36 [ Followup-To: set ] In comp.theory olcott wrote: > On 6/25/2024 4:22 AM, joes wrote: >> Am Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:47:24 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>> On 6/22/2024 1:39 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 21.jun.2024 om 15:21 schreef olcott: >>> When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct emulation is the >>> semantics of the x86 programming language then we see that when DDD is >>> correctly emulated by H0 that its call to H0(DDD) cannot possibly >>> return. >> Yes. Which is wrong, because H0 should terminate. [ .... ] > The call from DDD to H0(DDD) when DDD is correctly emulated > by H0 cannot possibly return. > Until you acknowledge this is true, this is the > only thing that I am willing to talk to you about. I think you are talking at cross purposes. Joes's point is that H0 should terminate because it's a decider. You're saying that when H0 is "correctly" emulating, it won't terminate. I don't recall seeing anybody arguing against that. So you're saying, in effect, H0 is not a decider. I don't think anybody else would argue against that, either. > -- > Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius > hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).