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: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly
 exist DOES NOT HALT
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 22:59:41 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <v64e3t$29pag$11@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>
 <v64b3e$2bc8m$2@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 22:59:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6cedb142f34e03a5852de86ea322d5ac";
	logging-data="2418000"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19F/sOMR02ut6KFtokmN2XC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hYr18mUkTrHBhVJSV992aEwKMwY=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v64b3e$2bc8m$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5881

Op 03.jul.2024 om 22:08 schreef olcott:
> 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 ...

HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself. Therefore, no such HHH 
exists that correctly simulates DDD.

> ... then this emulated DDD cannot possibly reach it
> own ret instruction and halt.

Speculating about what would happen with a HHH function that does not 
exists is futile.