Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: faithful simulations [was: Formal systems that cannot possibly be
 incomplete except for unknowns and unknowable]
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 11:07:11 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <59e6acb910e06a3117c04694b5118d3768b870b8@i2pn2.org>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me>
	<b47c9e70d415c1e5e469aaab846f0bd05e4bcc51@i2pn2.org>
	<vvall0$o6v5$1@dont-email.me> <vvc33h$25atc$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvcgja$1voc$1@news.muc.de> <vvd6pf$34l9k$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvdads$13pc$1@news.muc.de> <vvdcld$3arjo$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvg6r9$15e69$1@dont-email.me> <vvg7uu$158tp$4@dont-email.me>
	<vvg8tk$15e69$4@dont-email.me> <vvgai8$158tp$6@dont-email.me>
	<vvgcme$15e69$9@dont-email.me> <vvgjdo$18i6e$2@dont-email.me>
	<vvgkao$18q46$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 11:07:11 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3641096"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0

Am Wed, 07 May 2025 16:46:00 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/7/2025 4:30 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 07/05/2025 20:35, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/7/2025 1:59 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 07/05/2025 19:31, olcott wrote:

>>>>> I already know that the contradictory part of the counter-example
>>>>> input has always been unreachable code.
>>>>
>>>> If the code is unreachable, it can't be part of a working program, so
>>>> simply remove it.
>>>
>>> It is unreachable by the Halting Problem counter-example input D when
>>> correctly simulated by the simulating termination analyzer H that it
>>> has been defined to thwart.
>> 
>> If the simulation can't reach code that the directly executed program
>> reaches, then it's not a faithful simulation.
>> 
> If is was true that it is not a faithful simulation then you would be
> able to show exactly what sequence of instructions would be a faithful
> simulation.
A faithful simulation would produce the same behaviour as direct
execution, as HHH1 and UTM do.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.