Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 21:46:33 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <v4ctuq$1p0h1$2@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>
 <v4cp5s$1pe0q$1@dont-email.me> <v4cs0b$1p0h1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4csdq$1q0a8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 21:46:34 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4290016802773874b5346490e3d15051";
	logging-data="1868321"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+L13xY+x768U7MMVyCSF7F"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ghe3ickrBcAHUGPfC0c1ePXx/PU=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v4csdq$1q0a8$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3991

Op 12.jun.2024 om 21:20 schreef olcott:
> On 6/12/2024 2:13 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 12.jun.2024 om 20:24 schreef olcott:
>>> On 6/12/2024 1:19 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 12.jun.2024 om 16:47 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly. A correct H simulated by H does not exist. But, again, you 
>> misses the point. It was in the part that you omitted.
>> So, again:
>>
>> No infinite execution has been detected, only a premature abortion. 
> 
> On 5/29/2021 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/dTvIY5NX6b4/m/cHR2ZPgPBAAJ
> 
> If that was true then you could provide every step of D correctly
> simulated by H such that D simulated by H reaches its own simulated
> "ret" instruction.

I said that each H is unable to hit its target, so how could it reach 
the "ret" instruction of D? Please, think before you reply.

Try again, it is not that difficult. Just take the time to read and 
think about it.
You seem to think that the archer is trying to reach infinity. But that 
is not what I say.
If D does not reach its "ret," it is exactly because it was aborted. The 
target of the simulation was just some steps too far for this H, but not 
at infinity.

It is like an archer who is asked to hit a target twice as far as his 
bow can reach. His bow reaches 50m and the target is at 100m. He misses.
Then he uses a new bow that reaches 100m, but now the target is at 200m. 
He is able to reach the old target, but again he misses the target for 
the new bow. He can continue, if the bow reaches further, the target is 
also further away. But note, the target is never at infinity.
Similarly, the target of the simulator is never at infinity, but always 
some steps further that the simulation goes. You can make a simulator 
that simulates further, which can reach the target of the old simulator, 
but it is unable to reach its own target. So, there is no infinite 
recursion, but the simulation always misses the target. The simulation 
is never able to simulate itself up to the end. It always aborts 
prematurely.