Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:30:22 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <v466hu$7q6t$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@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> <v42jmv$3cg3t$33@i2pn2.org> <v42khp$2rs28$2@dont-email.me> <v42lsa$3cg3t$35@i2pn2.org> <v42m9c$2sko7$1@dont-email.me> <v4354k$3egp9$1@i2pn2.org> <v435nv$355ev$1@dont-email.me> <v4390i$3egpa$1@i2pn2.org> <v439g3$368s4$1@dont-email.me> <v43plg$3begc$1@dont-email.me> <v44ceb$3harn$4@dont-email.me> <v44jau$3k39u$1@dont-email.me> <v44ku9$3jnc8$9@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:30:23 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e311fff3086b626806b3f1f2b05f967c";
	logging-data="256221"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19q2H1OzOmKhyWfpQ4WsvZW"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4B+oQnmZak5P1SQdZtsEPnfaKYU=
Bytes: 6018

On 2024-06-09 16:23:37 +0000, olcott said:

> On 6/9/2024 10:56 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-09 13:58:35 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 6/9/2024 3:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-06-09 04:02:11 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 6/8/2024 10:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/8/24 10:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 9:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/8/24 6:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 5:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/24 6:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2024 4:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The simulated of DD is proven to be correct by the fact
>>>>>>>>>>> that both execution traces match the x86 source-code of DD.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Except that the actual x86 trace never gets back there, so this is NOT 
>>>>>>>>>> a "Correct simulation" trace of the input.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Yes and by this same incorrect reasoning
>>>>>>>>> <sarcasm>
>>>>>>>>>    we know that all infinite recursion always
>>>>>>>>>    terminates normally because "infinite recursion" is a
>>>>>>>>>    term-of-the-art that means {terminates normally}.
>>>>>>>>> </sarcasm>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So, how does the x86 processor get back to executing that adderess in 
>>>>>>>> the direct simulation by the outer HH as required by your definition of 
>>>>>>>> correct simulation.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Are you asking how does infinite recursion terminate normally?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> No, are you THAT stupid?
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I only missed Mensa by one point I am in the top 97%
>>>> 
>>>> In Mensa we call your kind of people "normal".
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thus directly disagreeing with the technical term that is
>>> applied to standard deviations above the mean. Top 3% is
>>> on the tail of the bell curve.
>> 
>> Loosely speaking all but last 2% is normal, and peoöoe usually
>> speak loosely.
>> 
> 
> More than two standard deviations above the mean is atypical.
> Two standard deviations below the mean is the measure of mental
> impairment qualifying for disability benefits.
> 
> An actual Mensa member would know this.

The difference between two standard deviations from mean and
past 98% of the population is so small it does not matter.

-- 
Mikko