Path: ...!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 16:02:26 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <v64e92$2bvgc$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>
 <v64as3$2bc8m$1@dont-email.me> <v64drn$29pag$10@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 23:02:26 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="29a678b7ecb7074967021c8dcb9f1179";
	logging-data="2489868"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IvOBA53AkHdAyheSRNqno"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Q9f2HHT9nv0i5bHpDwZvU+zFmQY=
In-Reply-To: <v64drn$29pag$10@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5095

On 7/3/2024 3:55 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 03.jul.2024 om 22:04 schreef olcott:
>> 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.
> 
> Why did do you ask such a strange question?
> Your trace shows that you didn't simulate the *finite* 
_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 HHH neither the
emulated DDD nor the emulated HHH can possibly stop
running unless DDD is aborted.

*Endlessly repeats until aborted*
HHH emulates DDD that calls HHH(DDD)

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