Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should
 I quit Richard at this point?
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2024 17:50:23 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v42jmv$3cg3t$33@i2pn2.org>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me> <v3mrli$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> <v3ve38$259cg$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3vf0b$24orn$4@dont-email.me> <v40u4u$2gi7t$1@dont-email.me>
 <v41k6l$2jqdk$8@dont-email.me> <v41l89$3cg3t$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v41nei$2kanc$8@dont-email.me> <v41oo8$3cg3t$22@i2pn2.org>
 <v41pbc$2kanc$15@dont-email.me> <v41raj$3cg3t$25@i2pn2.org>
 <v41s4e$2l7o9$2@dont-email.me> <v41sjf$3cg3s$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v41tj5$2ll6e$1@dont-email.me> <v41vc6$3cg3t$26@i2pn2.org>
 <v423a9$2m6lc$1@dont-email.me> <v426up$3de90$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v428ak$2no74$1@dont-email.me> <v42d6k$3de90$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v42e5i$2pofv$1@dont-email.me> <v42itv$3du6l$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v42j8p$2r808$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2024 21:50:23 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3555453"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <v42j8p$2r808$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3433
Lines: 38

On 6/8/24 5:42 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/8/2024 4:37 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sat, 08 Jun 2024 15:15:45 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 6/8/2024 2:59 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Sat, 08 Jun 2024 13:36:04 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 6/8/2024 1:12 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Sat, 08 Jun 2024 12:10:33 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 11:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/8/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 10:15 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/24 11:07 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 9:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/24 10:20 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 9:10 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are all the other HH?
>>>> Still waiting on this.
>>
>>>> A simulator that simulates something different than the real thing is
>>>> not a simulator.
>>> DD *correctly* simulated by HH has provably different behavior than the
>>> directly behavior of the executed DD(DD).
>  >
>> I mean, if one of them must be wrong, it can only be the simulator.
>>
> 
> I proved otherwise and you ignored it.
> 
> I am always going to stop reading at the first big mistake
> so this mistake can be focused on an corrected.
> 

So, you should have stopped reading your own writing decades ago.

When are you going to fix your x86utm to match your current definition 
of correct simulation?

It seems you are stuck with incorrect simulations in all your traces so 
you can't even argue anything correctly.