Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Recursive simulation (was: Hypothetical possibilities)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:37:59 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <ecdcfa1c7eb6c6bf7d4609e5744874e1d880d989@i2pn2.org>
References: <v7gl30$3j9fi$1@dont-email.me> <v7h1fl$3lcvq$3@dont-email.me>
	<v7h224$3li66$3@dont-email.me> <v7h3je$3lcvq$6@dont-email.me>
	<v7h55o$2a60$1@news.muc.de> <v7h5fi$3m6kq$3@dont-email.me>
	<v7inno$1uji$3@dont-email.me> <v7j5pf$3o7r$8@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:37:59 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4058496"; 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
Bytes: 2105
Lines: 21

Am Sun, 21 Jul 2024 09:25:51 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 7/21/2024 5:25 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 20.jul.2024 om 22:08 schreef olcott:

>>> It *is* a fact that no DDD correctly simulated by any pure function
>>> HHH ever reaches its own return instruction.
>> Which proves that these simulations are incorrect.
> *You don't get to be the judge of this*
> As long as the x86 machine language instructions of DDD are emulated by
> HHH according to the semantic meaning of these instructions then the
> emulation is correct and anyone that disagrees is disagreeing with a
> tautology.
They are not simulated correctly, they are aborted.

> This correct emulation must take into account the fact that DDD is
> calling its own emulator: HHH(DDD) in recursive emulation.
Only in so far that it also simulates all recursive calls.
Why is the return of HHH not simulated?

-- 
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.