Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant?
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 20:18:52 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 141
Message-ID: <v628ts$1s632$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v5vkun$1b0k9$1@dont-email.me> <v60dci$1ib5p$1@dont-email.me>
 <v60red$1kr1q$2@dont-email.me> <v61hn7$1oec9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v61ipa$1og2o$2@dont-email.me> <v61jod$1oec9$2@dont-email.me>
 <v61leu$1p1uo$1@dont-email.me>
 <7b6a00827bfcc84e99e19a0d0ae6028ebcdc263c@i2pn2.org>
 <v620vu$1qutj$2@dont-email.me>
 <f6e8f5de9a1e61c7970a92145ce8c1f9087ba431@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 03:18:53 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29a678b7ecb7074967021c8dcb9f1179";
	logging-data="1972322"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+C7Y3bGV8Pde1HUgJNccY+"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nbxY9VAc6Xf71A3Y0ymhSZ//jgY=
In-Reply-To: <f6e8f5de9a1e61c7970a92145ce8c1f9087ba431@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6541

On 7/2/2024 8:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 7/2/24 7:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/2/2024 5:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 7/2/24 3:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 7/2/2024 2:17 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 21:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 1:42 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 14:22 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 3:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 03:25 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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);
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows
>>>>>>>>>> that when HHH emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop,
>>>>>>>>>> Infinite_Recursion, and DDD that it must abort these emulations
>>>>>>>>>> so that itself can terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whether or not it *must* abort is not very relevant. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This <is> the problem that I am willing to discuss.
>>>>>>>> I am unwilling to discuss any other problem.
>>>>>>>> This does meet the Sipser approved 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>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Repeating the same thing that has already been proved to be 
>>>>>>> irrelevant does not bring the discussion any further.
>>>>>>> Sipser is not relevant, because that is about a correct 
>>>>>>> simulation. Your simulation is not correct.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you disagree with this you are either dishonest
>>>>>> or clueless I no longer care which one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> HHH repeats the process twice and aborts too soon. 
>>>>
>>>> You are freaking thinking too damn narrow minded.
>>>> DDD is correctly emulated by any HHH that can exist
>>>> which calls this emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process
>>>> until aborted (which may be never).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Only if your definiton of "Correct" includes things that are not 
>>> correct.
>>>
>>> Your problem is you just assume things to exist that don't, because 
>>> you don't understand what Truth actually means.
>>
> 
> So, where is that Diagonalization proof you said you had to show Godel 
> wrong?
> 
> Or are you just admitting you LIED about that?
> 
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>> }
>>
>> <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>
>>
>> *Professor Sipser would agree that HHH/DDD meets the above criteria*
>>
> Nope.
> 
> Your HHH that returns an answer does NOT "Correctly Simulate" its input 
> by the definition of producing the exact results of executing the 
> machine represented by it,

I can see what you fail to understand. Professor Sipser would
not make this same mistake.

Professor Sipser probably does understand the x86 language.
Shared-memory implementation of the Karp-Sipser
kernelization process
https://inria.hal.science/hal-03404798/file/hipc2021.pdf


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