Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <v3v9ll$242e9$7@dont-email.me>
Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<v3v9ll$242e9$7@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

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: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's
 10/2022 analysis
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:40:37 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <v3v9ll$242e9$7@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me>
 <J_CdnTaA96jxpcD7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87h6eamkgf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v3kcdj$3stk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3l7uo$13cp$8@dont-email.me> <v3lcat$228t$3@dont-email.me>
 <v3mq9j$chc3$1@dont-email.me> <v3mrli$chc4$1@dont-email.me>
 <_gWdnbwuZPJP2sL7nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v3nkqr$h7f9$3@dont-email.me> <v3p4ka$sk6h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3pp7p$v133$8@dont-email.me> <v3s27e$1f9kd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3sf1n$1gra7$11@dont-email.me> <v3sjo9$1ialb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3skoo$1iedv$1@dont-email.me> <v3u9ej$1v7rn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3v6i7$23l33$1@dont-email.me> <v3v70o$21qlc$3@dont-email.me>
 <v3v7j8$242e9$2@dont-email.me> <v3v7qh$21qlc$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3v8f9$242e9$3@dont-email.me> <v3v96e$39q1p$4@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 17:40:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ad5aa88e540ea762834522b410d9de6a";
	logging-data="2230729"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ofjpq8DrvMeClgpzPQfa3"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tEgv6RpahsMvFG5szmQLJdfUWdQ=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v3v96e$39q1p$4@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4500

On 6/7/2024 10:32 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Fri, 07 Jun 2024 10:20:09 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 6/7/2024 10:09 AM, Python wrote:
>>> Le 07/06/2024 à 17:05, olcott a écrit :
>>>> On 6/7/2024 9:55 AM, Python wrote:
>>>>> Le 07/06/2024 à 16:47, olcott a écrit :
>>> Anyway, you're wrong : a Turing machine can take its own description as
>>> part of its input, as it is finite.
>> That is what I said. They cannot however take actual Turing machines as
>> inputs it must always be a finite string machine description.
> Of course. That is not a restriction.
> 
>>>>>> The issue here is that I proved that DD correctly simulated by HH
>>>>>> has different behavior than the directly executed DD(DD) and
>>>>>> everyone's "rebuttal" to this proof is to simply ignore it.
>>>> When you actually try to form a rebuttal of the above you will see
>>>> that I am correct. So far everyone simply ignores the proof that I am
>>>> correct as their only rebuttal.
>> A {correct simulation} means that each instruction of the above x86
>> machine language of DD is correctly simulated by HH and simulated in the
>> correct order.
> And to the end. Thus it can't behave differently than direct execution.
> 

void Infinite_Recursion(u32 N)
{
   Infinite_Recursion(N);
}

You must not be very good at programming if you believe
that Infinite_Recursion must be simulated "to the end"

>> Anyone claiming that HH should report on the behavior of the directly
>> executed DD(DD) is requiring a violation of the above definition of
>> correct simulation.
> But those are the same. How does simulating something change it?
> 

It seems to boil down to you just don't know enough about
programming otherwise it would occur to you that there
cannot possibly exist any correct rebuttal to the following:

Try to show how this DD correctly simulated by any HH ever
stops running without having its simulation aborted by HH.

_DD()
[00001e12] 55         push ebp
[00001e13] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp
[00001e15] 51         push ecx
[00001e16] 8b4508     mov  eax,[ebp+08]
[00001e19] 50         push eax      ; push DD
[00001e1a] 8b4d08     mov  ecx,[ebp+08]
[00001e1d] 51         push ecx      ; push DD
[00001e1e] e85ff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH

A {correct simulation} means that each instruction of the
above x86 machine language of DD is correctly simulated
by HH and simulated in the correct order.

Anyone claiming that HH should report on the behavior
of the directly executed DD(DD) is requiring a violation
of the above definition of correct simulation.


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