| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<v64b3e$2bc8m$2@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
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,sci.logic Subject: DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 15:08:14 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 91 Message-ID: <v64b3e$2bc8m$2@dont-email.me> References: <v5pbjf$55h$1@dont-email.me> <v5r5q9$ekvf$1@dont-email.me> <v5s40h$jvgt$1@dont-email.me> <v5tgvj$utcb$1@dont-email.me> <v5u8c9$12udb$1@dont-email.me> <v608ft$1hqo6$1@dont-email.me> <v61hoo$1og2o$1@dont-email.me> <v61k27$1oec9$3@dont-email.me> <v61li2$1p1uo$2@dont-email.me> <v63205$23ohl$1@dont-email.me> <v63j94$26loi$4@dont-email.me> <v63sh7$28goi$3@dont-email.me> <v63soh$28dpi$4@dont-email.me> <v64327$29pc5$1@dont-email.me> <v643gd$29t4h$1@dont-email.me> <v6452f$29pag$2@dont-email.me> <v645of$29t4h$6@dont-email.me> <v6469t$29pag$5@dont-email.me> <v6473e$2agfo$2@dont-email.me> <v6480p$29pag$7@dont-email.me> <v648f2$2ape0$2@dont-email.me> <v648tv$29pag$9@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 22:08:14 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29a678b7ecb7074967021c8dcb9f1179"; logging-data="2470166"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18haDJ0RZIo6nLTrQVJreSx" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:txio57ceFcpUJwcP56RWVZjxVaY= In-Reply-To: <v648tv$29pag$9@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 5531 On 7/3/2024 2:31 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > Op 03.jul.2024 om 21:23 schreef olcott: >> On 7/3/2024 2:15 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 20:59 schreef olcott: >>>> On 7/3/2024 1:46 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 20:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 7/3/2024 1:25 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 19:58 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 12:51 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 18:03 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 is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an emulated HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>>> to repeat this process an endless number of times until aborted >>>>>>>>>> or out-of-memory error. >>>>>>>>> Anyone knowing the x86 language knows that a program cannot be >>>>>>>>> programmed to do two different things >>>>>>>>> It cannot do both run out of memory *and* abort. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> DDD correctly emulated by any element of the infinite >>>>>>>> set of every pure function HHH cannot possibly reach >>>>>>>> its own ret instruction and halt. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Exactly! Well done! This proves that HHH cannot possibly >>>>>>> correctly simulate itself. If it aborts, it does so one cycle too >>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My system of reasoning could be used to make a chatbot >>>>>> that would make all the propagandists look foolish even >>>>>> to themselves. The alternative is the destruction of the >>>>>> planet to earn a couple of more bucks. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is not some little game that can be played for >>>>>> trollish sadism. It has consequences. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I appreciate this motivation, but it does not help to make the >>>>> simulation correct. Better try something that can help, instead of >>>>> spoiling your time with something that does not work as you expected. >>>> >>>> That you lie about how it works does not mean it doesn't work. >>>> >>> >>> You are too soon with the words lie and liar. It does not contribute >>> to a honest discussion. >>> That you hope that it works, does not mean that it works, even when >>> your hope is based on an appreciated motivation. >> >> You are essentially disagreeing with arithmetic. >> There is an arithmetic to the meaning of words >> and to the behavior of x86 code. >> >> When I say 2 + 3 = 5 you are not free to disagree >> without big a liar. As soon as you disagree THAT MAKES YOU A LIAR >> > > Irrelevant. I do not deny that 2+3=5. > But if you claim that the x86 language says that a two cycle recursion > must be aborted, then I know who is ignoring the truth. _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] When DDD is correctly emulated by ANY PURE FUNCTION HHH THAT CAN POSSIBLY EXIST then this emulated DDD cannot possibly reach it own ret instruction and halt. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer