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: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- verified
 fact for 3 years
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:44:28 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v4auhs$3nf9m$3@i2pn2.org>
References: <v44dle$3i5jo$2@dont-email.me> <v44jvn$3jnc8$3@dont-email.me>
 <v44qin$3g17f$5@i2pn2.org> <v44ru8$3m841$3@dont-email.me>
 <v44usm$3g17f$6@i2pn2.org> <v45fq4$3sv37$1@dont-email.me>
 <v45h1l$3h642$1@i2pn2.org> <v45h88$3tjc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v45i42$3h641$2@i2pn2.org> <v45ive$3tpr9$2@dont-email.me>
 <v45jqr$3h642$3@i2pn2.org> <v45kiu$3ue8q$2@dont-email.me>
 <v45lak$3h641$3@i2pn2.org> <v45m0m$3ukqt$1@dont-email.me>
 <v46drm$13ke$1@news.muc.de> <v4737k$ggn5$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:44:28 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3915062"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <v4737k$ggn5$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4222
Lines: 78

On 6/10/24 10:39 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/10/2024 3:35 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>
>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 6/9/2024 8:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/9/24 9:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>>
>> [ .... ]
>>
>>>>> THIS IS AN OFFICIAL CEASE AND DESIST NOTIFICATION.
>>>>> STOP CALLING ME A LIAR.
>>
>>>> Then stop Lying!
>>
>>> *I never have lied and you know it*
>>
>> You have frequently lied.  All these times when you have called your
>> notions "verified facts",
> 
> They have been verified facts for three years and everyone
> simply ignored the verification.
> 
> *No one has verified the actual facts of this for THREE YEARS*
> *No one has verified the actual facts of this for THREE YEARS*
> *No one has verified the actual facts of this for THREE YEARS*




> 
> On 5/29/2021 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/dTvIY5NX6b4/m/cHR2ZPgPBAAJ
> 
> THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY for D simulated by H to have the same
> behavior as the directly executed D(D) is for the instructions
> of D to be incorrectly simulated by H (details provided below).

Which shows that H can not have actually correctly fully simulated the 
input, and thus its simulation doesn't tell us about halting.

> 
> _D()
> [00000cfc](01) 55          push ebp
> [00000cfd](02) 8bec        mov ebp,esp
> [00000cff](03) 8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00000d02](01) 50          push eax       ; push D
> [00000d03](03) 8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [00000d06](01) 51          push ecx       ; push D
> [00000d07](05) e800feffff  call 00000b0c  ; call H
> [00000d0c](03) 83c408      add esp,+08
> [00000d0f](02) 85c0        test eax,eax
> [00000d11](02) 7404        jz 00000d17
> [00000d13](02) 33c0        xor eax,eax
> [00000d15](02) eb05        jmp 00000d1c
> [00000d17](05) b801000000  mov eax,00000001
> [00000d1c](01) 5d          pop ebp
> [00000d1d](01) c3          ret
> Size in bytes:(0034) [00000d1d]
> 
> In order for D simulated by H to have the same behavior as the
> directly executed D(D) H must ignore the instruction at machine
> address [00000d07]. *That is an incorrect simulation of D*

Nope. In fact, if H ignores that instruction, it BY YOUR DEFINITION 
hasn't done a correct simulation.

> 
> H does not ignore that instruction and simulates itself simulating D.
> The simulated H outputs its own execution trace of D.
> 

No it isn't. A correct simulation thorugh the call H must show the 
simulation of the function H.

THis has not been shown, so you can't have a "verifited" fact about it, 
just further proving that "verified by Olcott" can't be taken as 
verified at all.