Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally?
Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 12:38:43 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 132
Message-ID: <v18g74$1vhpv$4@dont-email.me>
References: <v0k4jc$laej$1@dont-email.me> <v0m29q$166o1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0m37e$2gl1e$1@i2pn2.org> <v0m3v5$16k3h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0m55t$2gl1f$3@i2pn2.org> <v0m5sn$172p4$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0oban$1o3b$1@news.muc.de> <v0oce3$1q3aq$4@dont-email.me>
 <v0oe1b$1o3b$2@news.muc.de> <v0ofl3$1r1mf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0oh7g$1o3b$3@news.muc.de> <v0olhv$1sgeo$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0oobd$1o3b$4@news.muc.de> <v0or07$1tmga$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0qb59$2bsfc$1@dont-email.me> <v0r242$2hb7o$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0r3kh$hka$1@news.muc.de> <v0r5f2$2hb7o$11@dont-email.me>
 <v0r78v$hka$3@news.muc.de> <v0rd16$2k1bi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0t3uj$1iuj$2@news.muc.de> <v0tneg$37lgj$5@dont-email.me>
 <v0umsa$2qov3$3@i2pn2.org> <v0v0tm$3kdu6$5@dont-email.me>
 <v0vlmb$3ovek$1@dont-email.me> <v1098d$3tep8$2@dont-email.me>
 <v11fq3$2tlr1$5@i2pn2.org> <v12lp7$hk7o$6@dont-email.me>
 <v14uqb$14rq2$1@dont-email.me> <v15ed4$17unh$2@dont-email.me>
 <v17ec2$1oe3i$1@dont-email.me> <v1852r$1t4hn$2@dont-email.me>
 <v18dlu$5asq$3@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 05 May 2024 19:38:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="541e9246f979204e7e622a92e4a7a032";
	logging-data="2082623"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oVVXQnE7vevavey2bHXJD"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:uSmMI55sI4vCf4q2kUp70kYCKJU=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v18dlu$5asq$3@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 6854

On 5/5/2024 11:55 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/5/24 10:28 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/5/2024 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-04 13:49:24 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/4/2024 4:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-05-03 12:36:55 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/2/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/2/24 10:50 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/2/2024 4:16 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-02 03:22:29 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When I had to make changes to Bank's the VISA credit card system
>>>>>>>>>> I had to re-read the VISA change document fifteen times before
>>>>>>>>>> I was confident that I understood every relevant detail.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's only because there was no detail that you could not accept.
>>>>>>>>> Had there been one you could have stopped reading as soon you
>>>>>>>>> found it, perhaps even before reading first time to the end.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was because 99% of the details did not apply to my system
>>>>>>>> that I had to carefully study all of the details to see which
>>>>>>>> ones applied.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because your system doesn't meet the basic requirement of the 
>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Likewise with your proofs: as soon as one error is found there
>>>>>>>>> is no need to read further in order to determine that the proof
>>>>>>>>> is erroneous.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is no error in this and it is a verified fact not requiring
>>>>>>>> any subjective judgement call:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (a) It is a verified fact that D(D) simulated by H cannot
>>>>>>>> possibly reach past line 03 of D(D) simulated by H whether H
>>>>>>>> aborts its simulation or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proven wrong, and you have FAILED to even attempt to rebut that 
>>>>>>> proof, thus you have accepted that your claim is baseless and are 
>>>>>>> just being a pathological liar by repeating it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>> 08
>>>>>> 09 void main()
>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Post the exact time date stamp and quote where you proved it wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In one case it is ridiculous nonsense that you proved (a) is wrong.
>>>>>> You must show a counter example where 1 to N steps of D(D) are
>>>>>> simulated by H and the simulated D(D) reaches past its own line 03.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are ahead of Mikko he has no idea what D(D) simulated by H means.
>>>>>
>>>>> I certainly have, nore than you. One posiible interpretation is
>>>>> 'the direct execution of the same D as H was simulationg with the
>>>>> same D as input' but there are other possibilities. But one can
>>>>> also say that H may simulate any program with any input so "simulated
>>>>> by H" can be anything.
>>>>
>>>> <sarcasm>
>>>> Sure D simulated by H might mean play a game of tic-tac-toe
>>>> and then get into an infinite loop
>>>> </sarcasm>
>>>
>>> No, you have restricted D to mean constructed with the pattern above.
>>> There is no place for a game of tic-tac-toe unless H plays it. The
>>> infinite loop is there, so going there is no problem.
>>>
>>>> Richard "interpreted"
>>>> *D simulated by H* to mean
>>>> *D NEVER simulated by H*
>>>
>>> No, he interpreted it to mean 'simulation some finite number of steps
>>> (possibly zero) by H of the execution of D'. That is not his usual
>>> interpretation.
>>>
>>
>> The spec did not allow for zero steps.
> 
> The original spec did not prohibit it.
> 

*Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
*stop running unless aborted by H*

Does prohibit it. If you are having a hard time paying
attention to words that is not the same thing as lying.

>>
>> On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>  > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>>  >> *I HAVE SAID THIS AT LEAST 10,000 TIMES NOW*
>>  >> *Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly stop running unless*
>>  >> *aborted by H* does specify non-terminating behavior to H. When
>>  >> H aborts this simulation that does not count as D halting.
>>  >
>>  > Which is just meaningless gobbledygook by your definitions.
>>  >
>>  > It means that
>>  >
>>  > int H(ptr m, ptr d) {
>>  > return 0;
>>  > }
>>  >
>>  > is always correct, because THAT H can not possible simulate
>>  > the input to the end before it aborts it, and that H is all
>>  > that that H can be, or it isn't THAT H.
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer