Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: DDD emulated by HHH diverges from DDD emulated by HHH1
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 16:59:15 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <101qc32$11sr2$3@dont-email.me>
References: <101khcl$3bfvj$6@dont-email.me> <101mbnh$3sodg$1@dont-email.me>
 <101njgb$7qau$3@dont-email.me>
 <4113b5c3cb0e33212819ef36a4de858e40e70cba@i2pn2.org>
 <101noka$8rb8$4@dont-email.me> <101o96g$db96$3@dont-email.me>
 <101ob1t$hd6o$3@dont-email.me> <101obrf$hlr6$1@dont-email.me>
 <101ocan$hd6o$6@dont-email.me> <101ochl$i3m6$1@dont-email.me>
 <101oda2$hd6o$8@dont-email.me> <101oe1m$i3m6$3@dont-email.me>
 <101oee0$hd6o$9@dont-email.me> <101oeik$i3m6$4@dont-email.me>
 <101ofvi$inkg$1@dont-email.me> <101pask$pv5r$1@dont-email.me>
 <101porr$ta6v$1@dont-email.me> <101qb4p$11sr2$1@dont-email.me>
 <101qbtj$11qlg$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 22:59:15 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8d60a62c1b73c7b5bb0b863e34dc9efe";
	logging-data="1110882"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/eeZ5HXSM6+juEc/1WSX2R"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:k+g56HCHiQqKLkdkz6PN++ROQ4Q=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <101qbtj$11qlg$1@dont-email.me>

On 6/4/2025 4:56 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/4/2025 3:43 PM, dbush wrote:
>> On 6/4/2025 11:31 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/4/2025 6:32 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 6/3/2025 11:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Counter-factual as anyone that understands
>>>>> the x86 language can clearly see.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _DDD()
>>> [00002183] 55             push ebp
>>> [00002184] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
>>> [00002186] 6883210000     push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>> [0000218b] e833f4ffff     call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>> [00002190] 83c404         add esp,+04
>>> [00002193] 5d             pop ebp
>>> [00002194] c3             ret
>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002194]
>>>
>>> // First four instructions of DDD emulated by HHH1
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138d9
>>> [00002183][001138c9][001138cd] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH1
>>> [00002184][001138c9][001138cd] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH1
>>> [00002186][001138c5][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>> [0000218b][001138c1][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>> New slave_stack at:14e2f9
>>>
>>> // First four instructions of DDD emulated by emulated HHH
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:15e301
>>> [00002183][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH[0]
>>> [00002184][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH[0]
>>> [00002186][0015e2ed][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>> [0000218b][0015e2e9][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>> New slave_stack at:198d21
>>>
>>> // First four instructions of DDD emulated by emulated emulated HHH
>>> [00002183][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 55         push ebp      ; DDD of HHH[1]
>>> [00002184][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; DDD of HHH[1]
>>> [00002186][001a8d15][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
>>> [0000218b][001a8d11][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>
>>>>
>>>> False, as the side-by-side trace show exactly that and as you have 
>>>> admitted on the record *multiple times*:
>>>>
>>>
>>> There isn't enough room to put them side-by-side.
>>> The first paragraph is HHH1 simulating DDD
>>> The second paragraph is HHH simulating DDD
>>> The third paragraph is HHH simulating itself DDD
>>>
>>> There is no corresponding HHH1 simulating itself
>>
>>
>> Irrelevent.  A simulation by definition is not affected by what 
>> happened before the simulation started.
>>
>> What is relevant is that both HHH and HHH1 simulate DDD once, which 
>> includes simulating the code of HHH which in turn simulates DDD, and 
>> both are the same up to the point that HHH aborts, which you have 
>> admitted *multiple times* on the record:
>>
> 
> The simulation of DDD by HHH1 and HHH is exactly the same
> until HHH begins emulating itself (HHH1 never does this).
> 

False, as you have *explicitly* admitted:



On 6/4/2025 12:38 PM, olcott wrote:
 > On 6/4/2025 4:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
 >>
 >> That did not answer the question: WHAT INSTRUCTION, correctly 
simulated did that?
 >
 > When HHH1(DDD) simulates DDD it never simulates itself.
 > When HHH(DDD) simulates DDD then simulates itself simulating
 > DDD the first instruction that this simulated HHH simulates
 > diverges from the simulation that HHH1 did.
 >
 >> You cannot point to any instruction interpreted differently by the 
two simulators.
 >
 > There are no instructions interpreted differently.