Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v571lc$3rrgk$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.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: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 12:29:16 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 65 Message-ID: <v571lc$3rrgk$1@dont-email.me> References: <v56n8h$3pr25$1@dont-email.me> <v56ntj$onl3$7@i2pn2.org> <v56ps2$3q4ea$1@dont-email.me> <v56sk3$p1du$2@i2pn2.org> <v56tfv$3ql1v$2@dont-email.me> <v570n5$onl4$11@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:29:17 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="52f855e26d0a069f32049d753a1d455d"; logging-data="4058644"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19YkryLlOKrYjq/Rb9KW9vr" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:p81T6U1C2JDuA/zzjyewcX8WjpM= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <v570n5$onl4$11@i2pn2.org> Bytes: 3289 On 6/22/2024 12:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 6/22/24 12:18 PM, olcott wrote: >> >> void DDD() >> { >> HHH0(DDD); >> } >> >> The input to HHH0(DDD) includes itself. >> The input to HHH1(DDD) DOES NOT include itself. >> >> It is stipulated that correct emulation is defined by the >> semantics of the x86 programming language and nothing else. > > And thus, your emulation traces show that your "Simulating Halt > Deciders" do not do a "Correct Simulation" Apparently your ADD preventing you from paying close attention to ALL of my words. *Function names adapted to correspond to my updated paper* void DDD() { H0(DDD); } *When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct* *emulation is the semantics of the x86 programming language* *When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct* *emulation is the semantics of the x86 programming language* *When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct* *emulation is the semantics of the x86 programming language* *When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct* *emulation is the semantics of the x86 programming language* *When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct* *emulation is the semantics of the x86 programming language* then we see that when DDD is correctly emulated by H0 that its call to H0(DDD) cannot possibly return. _DDD() [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD) [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 [00002182] 5d pop ebp [00002183] c3 ret Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] When we define H1 as identical to H0 except that DDD does not call H1 then we see that when DDD is correctly emulated by H1 that its call to H0(DDD) does return. This is the same behavior as the directly executed DDD(). -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer