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: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 19:57:20 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <837f032435bec6b965ce0823bab2d43dd3e3a045@i2pn2.org>
References: <v6un9t$3nufp$1@dont-email.me> <v7013v$2ccv$1@dont-email.me>
 <v70nt7$61d8$6@dont-email.me>
 <58fc6559638120b31e128fe97b5e955248afe218@i2pn2.org>
 <v71mjh$bp3i$1@dont-email.me>
 <1173a460ee95e0ca82c08abecdefc80ba86646ac@i2pn2.org>
 <v71okl$bvm2$1@dont-email.me>
 <5f6daf68f1b4ffac854d239282bc811b5b806659@i2pn2.org>
 <v71ttb$crk4$1@dont-email.me>
 <60e7a93cb8cec0afb68b3e40a0e82e9d63fa8e2a@i2pn2.org>
 <v721po$h4kr$1@dont-email.me> <v75a0l$16bjt$1@dont-email.me>
 <v76dth$1cf96$3@dont-email.me> <v77sna$1o83i$1@dont-email.me>
 <v78grc$1rc43$7@dont-email.me> <v78if6$1rnr3$3@dont-email.me>
 <v78jva$1rc43$12@dont-email.me> <v78kmk$1rnr3$7@dont-email.me>
 <v78m3q$1smtm$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3650738"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v78m3q$1smtm$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4267
Lines: 68

On 7/17/24 10:56 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/17/2024 9:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 17.jul.2024 om 16:20 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/17/2024 8:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 17.jul.2024 om 15:27 schreef olcott:
>>>>>
>>>>> HHH is not allowed to report on the behavior of it actual self
>>>>> in its own directly executed process. HHH is allowed to report on
>>>>> the effect of the behavior of the simulation of itself simulating DDD.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But only on the effect of a correct simulation. 
>>>
>>> _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]
>>>
>>> *THIS IS SELF EVIDENT THUS DISAGREEMENT IS INCORRECT*
>>> DDD emulated by any pure function HHH according to the
>>> semantic meaning of its x86 instructions never stops
>>> running unless aborted.
>>>
>>
>> It is self evident that a program that aborts will halt.
>> The semantics of the x86 code of a halting program is also 
>> self-evident: it halts.
>> So, the aborting HHH, when simulated correctly, stops.
>> Dreaming of a HHH that does not abort is irrelevant.
>>
> 
> That is all the dishonest dodge of the strawman deception.
> HHH is required to halt by its design spec.

So, it is also required to answer the proper question given to it, that 
is does the program its input describe halt.

 From the memory address given to HHH, and the contents of memory, that 
answer is YES if HHH ever aborts its emulation and returns like you say 
it does.

Of course, if the input is just the bytes you try to make it out, you 
have lied that your HHH can correct emulate something that isn't 
actually a full x86 program, so you have shown yourself to just be a 
damned liar.

> 
> _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]
> 
> *THIS IS SELF EVIDENT THUS DISAGREEMENT IS INCORRECT*
> DDD emulated by any pure function HHH according to the
> semantic meaning of its x86 instructions never stops
> running unless aborted.
> 
>