Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 20:41:12 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <v5vlro$1b0k9$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v5pbjf$55h$1@dont-email.me> <v5r5q9$ekvf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5s40h$jvgt$1@dont-email.me> <v5sbpt$1kfbr$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v5sjsa$msl0$1@dont-email.me> <v5skc9$1kfbr$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v5smuk$n7a2$1@dont-email.me> <v5sorr$1kfbr$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v5sp4v$nnko$1@dont-email.me> <v5sr4t$1kfbq$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v5srjn$o1o0$1@dont-email.me> <v5ssaq$1kfbq$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v5st66$o7ss$1@dont-email.me> <v5su4q$1kfbr$11@i2pn2.org>
 <v5sv8o$ogo5$1@dont-email.me> <v5t0h8$1kfbr$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v5t1af$omq9$1@dont-email.me> <v5t3h4$1kfbr$13@i2pn2.org>
 <v5t470$t0hj$1@dont-email.me> <v5u2o5$1mj7k$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v5u8li$12udb$3@dont-email.me> <v5ujm6$1na1q$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v5ujvn$1550s$1@dont-email.me> <v5vi6d$1oanb$5@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2024 03:41:12 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="be8a74d1ebb79f081dc40b5f7175e5aa";
	logging-data="1409673"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1886XuX6O+4M+p8IcJXK688"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qK8lDzJmlru5xFTS5scHJHPyAVE=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v5vi6d$1oanb$5@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 5079

On 7/1/2024 7:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 7/1/24 12:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/1/2024 10:57 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 01 Jul 2024 07:49:54 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 7/1/2024 6:08 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/30/24 10:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/30/2024 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/30/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/30/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/30/24 9:03 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 6/30/2024 7:44 PM, Richard
>>>>>>>>> Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The call from DDD to HHH(DDD) when N steps of DDD are correctly
>>>>>>>>>> emulated by any pure function x86 emulator HHH at machine address
>>>>>>>>>> 0000217a cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>>>> But that is NOT the "behavior of the input", and CAN NOT BE SO
>>>>>>>>> DEFINED.
>>>
>>>>>>>> DDD is  emulated by HHH which calls an emulated HHH(DDD) to
>>>>>>>> repeat the process until aborted.
>>>>>>> And, since the HHH that DDD calls will abort is emulation, it WILL
>>>>>>> return to DDD and it will return also.
>>> Right.
>>>
>>>>> The emulation stops, and the emulating behavor of HHH stops, but not
>>>>> the behavior of the input.
>>>> When DDD is no longer being emulated all of its behavior stops. DDD is
>>>> the input.
>>> Again: emulating does not change what the input does of its own. 
>>> Aborting
>>> an emulation is premature, as the input does not contain an abort.
>>>
>>
>> *The title of this post is a lie*
>> *The title of this post is a lie*
>> *The title of this post is a lie*
> 
> Nope, it is the TRUTH.
> 
> OLCOTT is the one lying.
> 
>>
>> void Infinite_Loop()
>> {
>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>> }
>>
>> void Infinite_Recursion()
>> {
>>    Infinite_Recursion();
>> }
>>
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>    HHH(Infinite_Loop);
>>    HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
>>    HHH(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> *Each one of these cases meets this criteria*
>>
>> <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>
>>
> 
> Right. and since the definition of a "Correct Simulation" that Professor 
> Sipser would use (as with most of the world) is one that recreates the 
> full behavior of the program represented by the input, 

No Professor Sipser would agree to this:

_DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]

DDD is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an
emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted.


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