Path: ...!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: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0
 ---Boilerplate Reply
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 08:32:34 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <v5h59i$24jbd$8@dont-email.me>
References: <v4vrfg$2793f$1@dont-email.me> <v50o2t$2fh98$2@dont-email.me>
 <v51dc8$2jmrd$1@dont-email.me> <v53b0s$324b4$1@dont-email.me>
 <v53tjm$35vak$1@dont-email.me> <v5415i$lkkc$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v543k2$376u3$1@dont-email.me> <v5460r$lkkc$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v54br6$38n2k$2@dont-email.me> <v54c3r$lkkc$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v54crs$38n2k$4@dont-email.me> <v5f9fh$134dk$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v5fce0$1nsua$1@dont-email.me> <v5gig3$158st$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:32:34 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="863b71206377856c10e8f571e9178830";
	logging-data="2248045"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX193qRXd812A126MFp9ILcn0"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tqZ4gK7EuH6/W9zYQT3n8HCoOIU=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v5gig3$158st$1@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 2530

On 6/26/2024 3:11 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:22:08 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 6/25/2024 3:31 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:22:04 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> 
>>>> When there is no mapping from the finite string x86 machine language
>>>> input to H(D,D) to the behavior of D(D) then H(D,D) IS NOT being asked
>>>> about the behavior of D(D).
>>> It means that H can't do the mapping, i.e. it is not simulating
>>> correctly.
>>> It does a different map that doesn't fit its specification.
>> No that is incorrect. D correctly simulated by every H that can possibly
>> exist does not have the same behavior of any directly executed D(D) that
>> halts.
> H1 simulates D the same way it would actually behave. Is that wrong?
> 

When H1 simulates D there is no recursive simulation
because D calls H(D,D) and does not call H1(D,D).

When H simulates D there IS recursive simulation
because D calls H(D,D) and does not call H1(D,D).


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