Path: ...!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: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 19:17:09 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <v38gi5$1bndb$3@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v362eu$2d367$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v363js$vg63$2@dont-email.me> <v36803$2d368$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v368je$100kd$3@dont-email.me> <v373mr$2d367$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v37bpa$15n0b$1@dont-email.me> <v37i9p$lls$1@news.muc.de>
 <87y17smqnq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v37sap$18mfo$1@dont-email.me>
 <v38eq4$2foi0$1@i2pn2.org> <v38fe0$1bndb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v38g31$2foi0$11@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 02:17:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0a722b73a14c6c7bef786c05822a9348";
	logging-data="1433003"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+7Rhf02k6l7uJDuDZobdoX"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XDqlVMH+5FkUCENXaJL09EYVtDA=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v38g31$2foi0$11@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4974

On 5/29/2024 7:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/29/24 7:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/29/2024 6:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/29/24 2:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/29/2024 1:14 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How about a bit of respect?  Mike specifically asked you not to 
>>>>>> cite his
>>>>>> name as a back up for your points.  Why do you keep doing it?
>>>>>
>>>>> He does it to try to rope more people in.  It's the same ploy as
>>>>> insulting people by name.  It's hard to ignore being maligned in 
>>>>> public
>>>>> by a fool.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Thanks for validating my simplified encoding of the Linz*
>>>>
>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>>>>
>>>> I really did believe that Ben Bacarisse was lying when I said it.
>>>>
>>>> At the time I was talking about the easily verified fact of the actual
>>>> execution trace of fully operational code and everyone was denying the
>>>> easily verified facts.
>>>>
>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>> 00       int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>> 01       int D(ptr p)
>>>> 02       {
>>>> 03         int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
>>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>>> 07       }
>>>> 08
>>>> 09       int main()
>>>> 10       {
>>>> 11         H(D,D);
>>>> 12         return 0;
>>>> 13       }
>>>>
>>>> It turns out that two dozen people are easily proven wrong when
>>>> they claimed that the correct simulation of the input to H(D,D)
>>>> is the behavior of int main() { D(D); }
>>>>
>>>
>>> How is that?
>>>
>>>
>>>> When D is correctly simulated by H using an x86 emulator the only
>>>> way that the emulated D can reach its own emulated final state
>>>> at line 06 and halt is
>>>> (a) The x86 machine code of D is emulated incorrectly
>>>> (b) The x86 machine code of D is emulated in the wrong order
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which isn't a "Correct Simulation" by the definition that allow the 
>>> relating of a "Simulation" to the behavior of an input.
>>>
>>
>> Right the execution trace of D simulated by pure function H using
>> an x86 emulator must show that D cannot possibly reach its own
>> simulated final state and halt or the simulation of the machine
>> language of D is incorrect or in the wrong order.
> 
> So, you aren't going to resolve the question but just keep up with your 
> contradiction that H is simulating a template (that doesn't HAVE any 
> instrucitons of H in it) but also DOES simulate those non-existance 
> instructions by LYING about what it does and simulating a SPECIFIC 
> instance that it LIES behaves just like DIFFERENT specific instatces.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and call that an honest
misunderstanding. I have much more empathy for you now that I found
that Linz really did say words that you could construe as you did.

The infinite set of every H/D pair specified by the template
where D is correctly simulated by pure simulator H or pure function
H never has any D reach its own simulated final state and halt.

One element of the infinite set has been fully operational for
at least two years.

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