| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<v64as3$2bc8m$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 15:04:19 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 69 Message-ID: <v64as3$2bc8m$1@dont-email.me> References: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me> <v645v1$29pag$3@dont-email.me> <v646v5$2agfo$1@dont-email.me> <v647p3$29pag$6@dont-email.me> <v6480h$2ape0$1@dont-email.me> <v648nk$29pag$8@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 22:04:19 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29a678b7ecb7074967021c8dcb9f1179"; logging-data="2470166"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19iWJ1r9Lq/cO1/zooHXQmc" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:eyW1BzK7nPic36SBnoNHJARuErM= In-Reply-To: <v648nk$29pag$8@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 4209 On 7/3/2024 2:27 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > Op 03.jul.2024 om 21:15 schreef olcott: >> On 7/3/2024 2:11 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 20:57 schreef olcott: >>>> On 7/3/2024 1:40 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 20:20 schreef olcott: >>>>>> _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 correctly emulated by any element of the infinite >>>>>> set of every pure function HHH cannot possibly reach >>>>>> its own ret instruction and halt. That HHH aborts its >>>>>> emulation at some point or never aborts its emulation >>>>>> cannot possibly change this. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ad hominem attacks always try to hide a lack of argumentation. >>>>> >>>>> It has been proved that HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself. >>>> >>>> That is false and you know it. That might not be a >>>> flat out lie as it is an sloppy use of language. >>>> >>>> HHH does correctly simulate itself simulating DDD one time, >>>> then it stops correctly simulating itself because this criteria >>>> is met: >>>> >>>> HHH correctly simulates its input DDD until HHH >>>> correctly determines that its simulated DDD would >>>> never stop running unless aborted >>>> >>>> https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf >>>> >>>>> So, the above code shows that the incorrect simulation of DDD by >>>>> HHH is unable to reach the 'ret' instruction, because it either >>>>> never aborts, or aborts one cycle too soon, when the simulated HHH >>>>> is only one cycle from its own abort and return and then the return >>>>> of DDD would follow. >>>>> >>>> The criteria is: >>>> HHH correctly simulates its input DDD until HHH >>>> correctly determines that its simulated DDD would >>>> never stop running unless aborted >>> >>> It has been pointed out many times that this is sloppy use of language. >> >> It is the case that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot >> possibly reach its own ret instruction NO MATTER WHAT. > > This proves that HHH is unable to simulate itself. How the Hell do you think that you can get away with this when I proved that HHH does correctly emulate itself? https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf But you didn't simulate infinite behavior to the end. Of course I didn't infinite behavior HAS NO END. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer