Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Ben Bacarisse fails understand that deciders COMPUTE THE MAPPING
 FROM INPUTS --- I proved that I am correct and Mikko Ignored it
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 18:52:37 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <124947007f8ea68610d80a77920c3b768b8356ea@i2pn2.org>
References: <va104l$376ed$4@dont-email.me> <va24hl$3cvgv$1@dont-email.me>
 <431deaa157cdae1cae73a1b24268a61cf8ec2c1c@i2pn2.org>
 <va38qh$3ia79$1@dont-email.me>
 <7a1c569a699e79bfa146affbbae3eac7b91cd263@i2pn2.org>
 <va3f7o$3ipp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <729cc551062c13875686d266a5453a488058e81c@i2pn2.org>
 <va3kac$3nd5c$1@dont-email.me>
 <148bf4dd91f32379a6d81a621fb7ec3fc1e00db0@i2pn2.org>
 <va3lai$3nd5c$2@dont-email.me> <va46sd$3pr24$1@dont-email.me>
 <va4mle$3s0hu$1@dont-email.me>
 <5591ff08ed8f7b4bdf33813681e156b775efe0ec@i2pn2.org>
 <va63uu$2fo9$1@dont-email.me>
 <b0a86b6a1343ebb5f9112ae757768a7cbbc770b2@i2pn2.org>
 <va65r8$6ht7$1@dont-email.me>
 <da75188ffa7677bd2b6979c8fc6ba82119404306@i2pn2.org>
 <878qwn0wyz.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <efacnfsQdv-ErlT7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87le0jzc8f.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <vaj1kd$2kvg9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vamk31$3d76g$1@dont-email.me> <van30n$3f6c0$2@dont-email.me>
 <vap90d$3t06p$1@dont-email.me> <vaptvg$3vumk$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 22:52:37 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="189249"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vaptvg$3vumk$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4725
Lines: 79

On 8/29/24 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/29/2024 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-08-28 11:51:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 8/28/2024 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> This group is for discussions about the theory of computation and 
>>>> related
>>>> topics. Discussion about people is off-topic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Try to point to the tiniest lack of clarity in this fully
>>> specified concrete example.
>>>
>>> void DDD()
>>> {
>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>    return;
>>> }
>>>
>>> _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]
>>>
>>> HHH computes the mapping from DDD to behavior that never reaches
>>> its "return" statement on the basis of the x86 emulation of DDD
>>> by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>
>>> For all the  years people said that this simulation is incorrect
>>> never realizing that they were disagreeing with the semantics
>>> of the x86 language.
>>>
>>> Now that I point this out all that I get for "rebuttal" is bluster
>>> and double talk.
>>>
>>> The same thing applies to this more complex example that
>>> is simply over-the-head of most reviewers:
>>>
>>> int DD()
>>> {
>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>> }
>>
>> Nice to see that you don't disagree.
>> But you should not use subject lines that are off-topic for the group.
>>
> 
> When a specific reviewer makes a specific mistake in
> reviewing my work related to this group I must refer
> to that specific reviewer's mistake to clear my name.
> 
> I could generalize it. No one person here besides myself
> sufficiently understands the details of how a simulating
> halt decider computes the mapping from an input finite
> string to the behavior that this finite sting specifies.

No, *YOU* do not understand the mapping that the decider is SUPPOSED to 
be computing, because you just don't understand the meaning of the words.

> 
> I specifically referred to Ben because he got everything
> else correctly. Most everyone else cannot even understand
> that correct simulation is defined by HHH emulating DDD
> according to the semantics of the x86 language.
> 
> Fred thinks the when DDD is emulated by HHH according to
> the semantics of the x86 language and this causes an
> emulated HHH to not halt then the emulation is wrong.
> 
> simlation
>