Path: ...!news.misty.com!2.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: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise ---
 pinned down
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:24:57 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 237
Message-ID: <v3g3ja$2vho5$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v3bg39$22o6m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3cbhu$2k3ld$1@i2pn2.org> <v3clo2$28p7n$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dft1$2lfup$1@i2pn2.org> <v3dhob$2dio8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dk0d$2lfup$2@i2pn2.org> <v3dkf2$2e2po$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dmnc$2lfup$3@i2pn2.org> <v3do66$2ejq2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dqka$2lfup$4@i2pn2.org> <v3dsev$2f6ul$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dtt4$2lfup$5@i2pn2.org> <v3dvr3$2jgjd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3e0rj$2lfup$6@i2pn2.org> <v3e1m6$2jmc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3f09p$2n53o$1@i2pn2.org> <v3feqn$2rdp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fgat$2n53n$5@i2pn2.org> <v3fhan$2rsbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fi55$2n53o$6@i2pn2.org> <v3fiq7$2rsbs$5@dont-email.me>
 <v3flc5$2n53o$7@i2pn2.org> <v3flm8$2sm3s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fm1e$2n53n$8@i2pn2.org> <v3fmlc$2sogn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fncn$2n53n$9@i2pn2.org> <v3fo1p$2t1ac$2@dont-email.me>
 <v3fqpt$2tjjm$1@dont-email.me> <v3fu48$2ulbk$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3g0b9$2n53n$17@i2pn2.org> <v3g0q4$2v3lp$3@dont-email.me>
 <v3g2t2$2n53n$20@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2024 23:24:58 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5617c6a52e82e3edb2307f1199229213";
	logging-data="3131141"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+aEfY3K8Uw5j0farkqXbU0"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mXf2bvP4QkyTFVsURqJKtuvY4IA=
In-Reply-To: <v3g2t2$2n53n$20@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 12038

On 6/1/2024 4:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/1/24 4:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/1/2024 3:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/1/24 3:51 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/1/2024 1:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 01.jun.2024 om 20:07 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 12:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 1:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 12:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 1:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 11:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 10:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 11:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *I will not discuss any other points with you until 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after you either*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) Acknowledge that DD correctly simulated by HH and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      simulated by embedded_H remain stuck in recursive 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      1 to ∞ of correct simulation or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Correctly prove otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And until you answer the question of what that actually 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> means, I will reply WHO CARES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 00       int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 01       int DD(ptr p)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02       {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 03         int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 07       }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 09       int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10       {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11         HH(DD,DD);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12         return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13       }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every DD correctly simulated by any HH of the infinite set 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of HH/DD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pairs that match the above template never reaches past its 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own simulated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line 03 in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation of DD by HH.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this case HH is either a pure simulator that never 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halts or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HH is a pure function that stops simulating after some 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite number
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of simulated lines. The line count is stored in a local 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The pure function HH always returns the meaningless value 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of 56
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after it stops simulating.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, still no answer, to teh question. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You can pretend that you don't understand something that you 
>>>>>>>>>>>> do indeed
>>>>>>>>>>>> understand into perpetuity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The key measure of dishonestly would be that you continue to 
>>>>>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>>>>>> that you don't understand yet never ever point out exactly 
>>>>>>>>>>>> what you
>>>>>>>>>>>> don't understand and why you don't understand it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I giuess that Mean YOU don't even know what you are asking, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> though it seems that now you are admitting that your HH 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't actually ANSWER the question, so it isn't ACTUALL a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> decider for any function except the "56" mapping.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will repeat the question and until you answer the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> question of what that actually means, I will reply WHO CARES.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DO you mean the simulation of the TEMPLATE DD, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Of course I don't mean that nonsense. I mean exactly what I 
>>>>>>>>>>>> specified*
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which means that we CAN'T simulate the call HH as we have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> no code past point to simulate, and thus your claim is just 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or, do you mean a given instance of HH simulating a given 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instance of DD, at which point we never have the 1 to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> infinte number of simulatons of THAT INPUT, so your claim 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Its not that hard when one refrains from dishonesty*
>>>>>>>>>>>> We can't even say that you forgot these details from one reply
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the next because the details are still in this same post.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And every one gives a meaningless answer, 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *THEN TRY TO REFUTE THIS UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT*
>>>>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HH with an x86 emulator cannot possibly
>>>>>>>>>> reach past its own machine instruction [00001c2e] in any finite
>>>>>>>>>> number of steps of correct emulation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why? I don't care about it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I have said, the implication of your definition of "Correct 
>>>>>>>>> SImulation" means that this says NOTHING about the halting 
>>>>>>>>> behavior of DD. (only not halted yet)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *THEN TRY TO REFUTE THIS UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT*
>>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HH with an x86 emulator cannot possibly
>>>>>>>> reach past its own machine instruction [00001c2e] in any finite
>>>>>>>> *or infinite* number of steps of correct emulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I say it that way you claim to be confused and what I do
>>>>>>>> not say it that way you claim what I say is incomplete proof.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WHy do I care? I won't spend the effort to even try to refute 
>>>>>>> something that is clearly meaningless.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You seem to have a conflict of definitions, as a given DD will 
>>>>>>> only ever be simulated by ONE given HH that only simuates for one 
>>>>>>> number of steps.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>>>> 00       int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>> 01       int DD(ptr p)
>>>>>> 02       {
>>>>>> 03         int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>>>>>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> 07       }
>>>>>> 08
>>>>>> 09       int main()
>>>>>> 10       {
>>>>>> 11         HH(DD,DD);
>>>>>> 12         return 0;
>>>>>> 13       }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You continue to either fail to understand or seemingly more likely
>>>>>> simply lie about the fact that every DD correctly simulated by any
>>>>>> HH that can possibly exist cannot possibly reach past its own line 
>>>>>> 03.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only if the simulation of HH simulated by HH does not reach HH's 
>>>>> return, otherwise the simulation of DD would go to line 04.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========