Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH
Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 08:21:53 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <d99804f9e421caf3368ad1d75507008c320adf40@i2pn2.org>
References: <v4vrfg$2793f$1@dont-email.me> <v5efod$1ikpr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ejau$1iq57$1@dont-email.me> <v5eup8$1lar1$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5f1nm$1lp16$1@dont-email.me> <v5f246$1m2fl$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5f3fg$1lp16$2@dont-email.me> <v5f3j8$1m2fl$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5f54f$1lp16$3@dont-email.me> <v5f5sd$1mcif$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ght9$21jrt$1@dont-email.me> <v5h558$24jbd$7@dont-email.me>
 <v5jcas$2m18t$2@dont-email.me> <v5k7ju$2qsdr$5@dont-email.me>
 <v5mcvo$1cgj0$3@i2pn2.org> <v5mklg$3cibm$7@dont-email.me>
 <v5mo8a$1d3t3$2@i2pn2.org> <v5mqge$3e4fd$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5msjt$1d3t3$9@i2pn2.org> <v5mtba$3elj0$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5n2ah$1d3t3$10@i2pn2.org> <v5n2sk$3fm1k$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5po6i$1h5u1$1@i2pn2.org> <v5pp9m$2jk8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5r5p4$1irrf$1@i2pn2.org> <v5s4f4$jvgt$3@dont-email.me>
 <v5tp92$vsqr$2@dont-email.me> <v5u94l$12udb$5@dont-email.me>
 <v5uec2$12qkb$2@dont-email.me> <v5uesa$145ld$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5ugei$12qkb$4@dont-email.me> <v5uh66$14k9s$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 13:22:24 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1731810"; 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: <v5uh66$14k9s$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5045
Lines: 93

On 7/1/24 11:15 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/1/2024 10:02 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 01.jul.2024 om 16:35 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/1/2024 9:27 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 01.jul.2024 om 14:57 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 7/1/2024 3:27 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 30.jun.2024 om 19:25 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 6/30/2024 3:42 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, I mean: why does the inner simulator repeat instead of 
>>>>>>>> aborting,
>>>>>>>> the same as the outer one does?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Technically it is called detecting a repeating state.
>>>>>>>> Yeah, I know. My point is: all recursive calls both enter and 
>>>>>>>> detect
>>>>>>>> a repeating state.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The inner ones always see one less execution trace
>>>>>>> than the next outer one, thus could only meet their
>>>>>>> abort criteria after they have already been aborted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which indicates that they were aborted too soon, showing that the 
>>>>>> emulation was incorrect.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless the outer HHH aborts its simulation after some
>>>>> fixed number of correct emulations or none of the HHH
>>>>> ever aborts and HHH never stops running.
>>>>
>>>> But that does not make the result of the abort correct.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Not aborting will loop infinitely. 
>>>
>>>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
>>>      until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
>>>      stop running unless aborted
>>>
>>> THEN H IS NECESSARILY CORRECT TO ABORT
>>> THEN H IS NECESSARILY CORRECT TO ABORT
>>> THEN H IS NECESSARILY CORRECT TO ABORT
>>
>> It is inevitable to abort, but that does not make the simulation 
>> correct, because:
>>
> 
> Of every possibility that can possibly be is is absolutely
> not inevitable to abort.

But only ONE *IS* the HHH that is in Halt7.c

Without that definition, DDD can't exist.

> 
> DDD correctly emulated by HHH is either aborted at some point
> or crashes due to out-of-memory error.

But for DDD to exist to be correctly simulated, a SPECIFIC HHH needs to 
be defined, That is the HHH In Halt7.c per you own stipulation. Since 
that aborts, that is what HHH does, or you are just admitting to being a 
liar.

Of course, you also contradict yourself, by also saying that DDD isn't a 
program, because you can't let it include that code of HHH limiting what 
HHH can be, in which case NO HHH can correct simulate that which isn't a 
program.

> 
> You just aren't very good at these things are you?

It seems the problem is at Peter's end, as he has broken his system with 
conttadiction, becuase he has refused to learn the meaning of the words, 
lie Program, or correct simulation.

> 
>>>
>>>> Aborting will abort too soon. Both cases are incorrect.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It doesn't seem like you care about the truth.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no passing the guy in front of you if you both
>>>>> continue to run at the exact same speed, he will always
>>>>> be ahead of you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But shooting his tyres is also incorrect.
>>>
>>
>