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
Subject: Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD incorrectly simulated by HHH
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:03:05 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <v5n8e9$3gt9c$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v4vrfg$2793f$1@dont-email.me> <v58m12$8mmo$1@dont-email.me>
 <v59797$brmn$1@dont-email.me> <v5b7nv$qvrb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5btf3$v0vb$4@dont-email.me> <v5chru$10816$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v5cn01$149dc$1@dont-email.me> <v5ebvr$1hs89$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5efod$1ikpr$1@dont-email.me> <v5ejau$1iq57$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5eup8$1lar1$2@dont-email.me> <v5f1nm$1lp16$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5f246$1m2fl$1@dont-email.me> <v5f3fg$1lp16$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5f3j8$1m2fl$2@dont-email.me> <v5f54f$1lp16$3@dont-email.me>
 <v5f5sd$1mcif$1@dont-email.me> <v5ght9$21jrt$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5h3rd$24jbd$6@dont-email.me> <v5jbub$2m18t$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5k72o$2qsdr$4@dont-email.me> <v5lqul$386u3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5mgd9$3cds2$1@dont-email.me> <v5mi5t$3cmj8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5mj8m$3cibm$3@dont-email.me> <v5mobr$1d3t3$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v5mv5n$3f3fn$1@dont-email.me> <v5n2n4$1d3t3$11@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:03:05 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8e198617313100a552662932ac49ce17";
	logging-data="3700012"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18iv/ddiEd6Ce3wIii0TwD1"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:IBJYy91tLelKL76jD35QJ9xxndE=
In-Reply-To: <v5n2n4$1d3t3$11@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3589

On 6/28/2024 2:25 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:24:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 6/28/2024 11:28 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:01:41 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 6/28/2024 9:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 28.jun.2024 om 16:12 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/28/2024 3:06 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 27.jun.2024 om 19:21 schreef olcott:
>>>
>>>>>>>> The call from DDD to H0(DDD) when DDD is correctly emulated by x86
>>>>>>>> emulator H0 cannot possibly return.
>>>> That is counter-factual. HHH(DDD) does correctly emulate the call from
>>>> DDD to HHH(DDD) emulating itself emulating DDD.
> You are really immune to contradictions, are you?
> 
>> HHH correctly emulates DDD including emulating itself emulating DDD and
>> sees that this proves that DDD is stuck in recursive simulation thus
>> aborts DDD and correctly returns 0 indicating it has rejected its input
>> according to this criterion:
> If it were able to correctly simulate itself it would see that its
> recursive call also aborts, and could accept DDD as halting.
> 

*You might just be too dumb to comprehend this*

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
     stop running unless aborted then

     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

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