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: Liar detector: Peter Olcott
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 22:30:37 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <6e230f94750ad2c06c1a93939057adcef81af81a@i2pn2.org>
References: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me> <v6e67v$bbcb$4@dont-email.me>
 <v6gss2$t87a$1@dont-email.me> <v6gv65$to0m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6h2li$ud7p$1@dont-email.me> <v6h2rm$ue7s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6h3cu$ud7p$2@dont-email.me> <v6h83q$vag9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6ikgb$19f5g$1@dont-email.me> <v6jgjo$1ctoi$4@dont-email.me>
 <v6lckp$1qi9e$1@dont-email.me> <v6m2qq$1tj30$6@dont-email.me>
 <60a1c2490e9bd9a5478fd173a20ed64d5eb158f9@i2pn2.org>
 <v6nvn8$2bn6q$1@dont-email.me> <v6oqti$2fuva$7@dont-email.me>
 <v6qn6k$2ubkt$1@dont-email.me> <v6r9q1$30qtt$5@dont-email.me>
 <v6tbge$3gegs$1@dont-email.me> <v6tqlm$3imib$5@dont-email.me>
 <v6vvid$24jd$1@dont-email.me> <v70mih$61d8$3@dont-email.me>
 <v72i9m$jne3$1@dont-email.me> <v7367p$mjis$8@dont-email.me>
 <v755m4$15kf6$1@dont-email.me> <v75vl9$19j7l$7@dont-email.me>
 <v77p77$1nm3r$1@dont-email.me> <v78fa7$1rc43$2@dont-email.me>
 <v7agsg$2am9u$1@dont-email.me> <v7b4l2$2e2aq$2@dont-email.me>
 <v7b7ur$2er3u$1@dont-email.me> <v7b8d9$2e2aq$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 02:30:37 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3700917"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <v7b8d9$2e2aq$7@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4380
Lines: 60

On 7/18/24 10:21 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/18/2024 9:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 18.jul.2024 om 15:17 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/18/2024 2:40 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-17 13:00:55 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/17/2024 1:43 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-07-16 14:21:28 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When simulated input DDD stops running {if and only if}
>>>>>>> the simulation of this input DDD has been aborted this
>>>>>>> necessitates that input DDD specifies non-halting behavior
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DDD does not stop runnig unless it is completely exeuted.
>>>>>
>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>> [00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>> [00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
>>>>> [0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>>> [00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>> [00002173] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>> [00002174] c3         ret
>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
>>>>>
>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantic meaning of
>>>>> its x86 instructions never stop running unless aborted.
>>>>
>>>> You mean HHH's simulation of DDD may not termite before HHH aborts it?
>>>
>>> When we examine the infinite set of every HHH/DDD pair such that:
>>> HHH₁ one step of DDD₁ is correctly emulated by HHH₁.
>>> HHH₂ two steps of DDD₂ are correctly emulated by HHH₂.
>>> HHH₃ three steps of DDD₃ are correctly emulated by HHH₃.
>>> ...
>>> HHH∞ The emulation of DDD∞ by HHH∞ never stops running.
>>
>> And we have proved that each of these infinite set of simulations is 
>> incorrect.
>>
>>>
>>> When each DDD of the HHH/DDD pairs above is correctly emulated
>>> by its corresponding HHH according to the semantic meaning of its
>>> x86 instructions it CANNOT POSSIBLY reach past its own machine
>>> address 0000216b, not even by an act of God.
>>
>> Which proves that the simulation is incorrect.
> 
> As long as each instruction is simulated according to its
> semantic meaning then even of God himself disagrees that it
> is correct then God himself is wrong.
> 

And how do you simulate the instruction after the call when that 
instruciton doesn't exist by your definition?

I guess you "universe" only has 4 steps.

Remember, the "semantic" meaning of a call instruction to the x86 is to 
push the return address on the stack and then start executing at the 
target address.