Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 13:24:59 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 122
Message-ID: <v4cp5s$1pe0q$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v428vv$2no74$2@dont-email.me> <v43ib7$38hnd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4628o$6ero$1@dont-email.me> <v468qt$7uvj$1@dont-email.me>
 <v47joj$je45$1@dont-email.me> <v47kt3$jhs8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v47l92$je45$2@dont-email.me> <v48tt4$tqad$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4a07r$157ic$1@dont-email.me> <v4beis$1h0p6$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4cceu$1mi5i$2@dont-email.me> <v4corm$1p0h0$1@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 20:25:00 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6f170c39f5487c8533188545300f883a";
	logging-data="1882138"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/GXIFOwICuoXtRXT2taylD"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aZuO7MKu5PRj6VPWi2yW9uSF3Fk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v4corm$1p0h0$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 7535

On 6/12/2024 1:19 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 12.jun.2024 om 16:47 schreef olcott:
>> On 6/12/2024 1:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 11.jun.2024 om 19:07 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/11/2024 2:21 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 10.jun.2024 om 21:47 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> 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).
>>>>>
>>>>> Proven false. The direct execution does not ignore the call to H. 
>>>>
>>>> Yes that is the second big mistake that I am aware that I made
>>>> within the last year.
>>>>
>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>>>>
>>>> The other big mistake was what I said happens when Linz H is
>>>> applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩. I forgot what I said and I forgot what the
>>>> correct answer was. I do remember this is was my big mistake.
>>>>
>>>> No one has ever shown any actual error with my analysis of embedded_H
>>>> applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩. It is a verified fact that is over everyone's head
>>>> besides mine that ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by embedded_H cannot
>>>> possibly reach its own simulated final state of ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone assumes that I must be wrong and only have dogma to base
>>>> this assumption on. I have reasoning to prove that they are wrong
>>>> yet this reasoning is over their heads.
>>>>
>>>> I have made isomorphic reasoning 100% concrete with this example
>>>> and every has simply ignored this reasoning 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*
>>>> *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
>>>>
>>>> _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]
>>>>
>>>> It is impossible for D correctly simulated by H to ever reach
>>>> its simulated final state at its own machine address [00000d1d].
>>>>
>>>> People disagree with this by changing the subject to D not simulated
>>>> by H as all. They have been indoctrinated into believing that this
>>>> strawman deception is correct yet
>>>>
>>>> cannot possibly show the detailed steps of how D correctly simulated
>>>> by H can possibly reach its own simulated machine address of 
>>>> [00000d1d].
>>>> *Here are the steps that prove that I am correct*
>>>>
>>>> (1) Executed H simulates the first seven instructions of D.
>>>>
>>>> (2) Simulated D calls simulated H(D,D) to simulate itself again.
>>>>
>>>> (3) Simulated H simulates the first seven instructions of simulated
>>>>      simulated D.
>>>>
>>>> (4) Simulated simulated D simulated by simulated H calls
>>>>      simulated simulated H(D,D) to simulate itself again.
>>>>
>>>> *HERE ARE ALL OF CONCRETE DETAILS OF THAT*
>>>> *Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:cfc*
>>>> [00000cfc][00211839][0021183d](01)  55          push ebp      ; begin D
>>>> [00000cfd][00211839][0021183d](02)  8bec        mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00000cff][00211839][0021183d](03)  8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d02][00211835][00000cfc](01)  50          push eax      ; push D
>>>> [00000d03][00211835][00000cfc](03)  8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d06][00211831][00000cfc](01)  51          push ecx      ; push D
>>>> [00000d07][0021182d][00000d0c](05)  e800feffff  call 00000b0c ; call H
>>>> *This call to H is simulated by directly executed H*
>>>>
>>>>   machine   stack     stack     machine          assembly
>>>>   address   address   data      code             language
>>>>   ========  ========  ========  ===============  =============
>>>> [00000cfc][0025c261][0025c265](01)  55          push ebp      ; begin D
>>>> [00000cfd][0025c261][0025c265](02)  8bec        mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00000cff][0025c261][0025c265](03)  8b4508      mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d02][0025c25d][00000cfc](01)  50          push eax      ; push D
>>>> [00000d03][0025c25d][00000cfc](03)  8b4d08      mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> [00000d06][0025c259][00000cfc](01)  51          push ecx      ; push D
>>>> [00000d07][0025c255][00000d0c](05)  e800feffff  call 00000b0c ; call H
>>>> *This call to H would be simulated by simulated executed H*
>>>> *Infinitely Nested Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no infinite nested simulation detected,
>>
>> If I am wrong then a specific sequence of steps of D correctly
>> simulated by H where D terminates normally can be provided.
> 
> No infinite execution has been detected, 

You seem to simply not understand that D correctly simulated
by H would eventually crash due to out-of-memory error.

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