Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 08:22:57 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 71 Message-ID: References: <7b6a00827bfcc84e99e19a0d0ae6028ebcdc263c@i2pn2.org> <178edf6a7c5329df35a9af6852ecbd41c0948ea1@i2pn2.org> <168858894febbaa529d1704ea864bbe15cb8f635@i2pn2.org> <211a07c98d1fc183ed3e6c079ec1e883dd45f1cc@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 15:22:57 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29a678b7ecb7074967021c8dcb9f1179"; logging-data="2316050"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+nQuocNe+dNU4M9IBkMCjs" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:tGMgsZXMurluL01Z119nBgqS+44= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4169 On 7/3/2024 3:33 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > Op 03.jul.2024 om 05:07 schreef olcott: >> On 7/2/2024 9:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 7/2/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/2/2024 8:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 7/2/24 9:32 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/2/2024 8:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/2/24 9:18 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Professor Sipser probably does understand the x86 language. >>>>>>>> Shared-memory implementation of the Karp-Sipser >>>>>>>> kernelization process >>>>>>>> https://inria.hal.science/hal-03404798/file/hipc2021.pdf >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> And the x86 language says the same thing, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> YOU are just a liar, as proved by the fact that you can not give >>>>>>> the Diagonalization proof you claimed you had. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, you are just too stupid to understand. >>>>>> >>>>>> You continue to assume that you can simply disagree >>>>>> with the x86 language. My memory was refreshed that >>>>>> called you stupid would be a sin according to Christ. >>>>>> I really want to do the best I can to repent. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But I am NOT disagreeing with the x86 language. >>>>> >>>>> Can you point out what fact of it I am disagreing about it? >>>>> >>>> >>>> You keep trying to get away with saying that the simulation is >>>> incorrect when the semantics of the x86 language conclusively >>>> proves that it is correct. >>> >>> Nope, and x86n emulation is only fully correct if it continues to the >>> final end. >> >> void Infinite_Loop() >> { >>    HERE: goto HERE; >> } >> >> Why do you say such ridiculously stupid things that you are are false? >> > > Your Infinite_Loop does not apply. For a two cycle recursive simulation > This says nothing about two cycles nitwit. _DDD() [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 [00002182] 5d pop ebp [00002183] c3 ret Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] DDD is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer