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
Subject: Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant?
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 10:56:10 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <v66gmq$2qr6f$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>
 <dd109397687b2f8e74c3e1e3d826772db8b65e40@i2pn2.org>
 <v62i31$21b7a$1@dont-email.me> <v632ta$23ohm$2@dont-email.me>
 <v63jej$26loi$6@dont-email.me> <v63s4h$28goi$2@dont-email.me>
 <v63s92$28dpi$3@dont-email.me> <v63t3r$28goi$6@dont-email.me>
 <v63tpd$28dpi$8@dont-email.me>
 <67a72a6769c3e0d96ba03aea4988153781ba01a0@i2pn2.org>
 <v665rb$2oun1$9@dont-email.me>
 <f808427bbd01195fa8ff6793e98c2ca162ac98de@i2pn2.org>
 <v668tr$2pc84$3@dont-email.me>
 <32a0b6d30a6fd14b8558749c01badb0692661dcf@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2024 17:56:11 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8ec8ab09a9c087279b96ae2505557d8c";
	logging-data="2976975"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+3Zz9wmggaSA2jfMWZll9J"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:91nKjNK133vTLuEZ1KfXw12pNtU=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <32a0b6d30a6fd14b8558749c01badb0692661dcf@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4994

On 7/4/2024 10:07 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:43:22 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/4/2024 8:38 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 04 Jul 2024 07:50:51 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 7/4/2024 5:38 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Wed, 03 Jul 2024 11:21:01 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 11:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 17:55 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 10:52 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 15:24 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 3:42 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 05:55 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 10:50 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 02 Jul 2024 14:46:38 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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:
>>>
>>>>>>>>> Similarly, if you think that HHH can simulate itself correctly,
>>>>>>>>> you are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>            int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>>>>>            int main()
>>>>>>>>>            {
>>>>>>>>>              return H(main, 0);
>>>>>>>>>            }
>>>>>>>>> You showed that H returns, but that the simulation thinks it does
>>>>>>>>> not return.
>>>>>>>>> DDD is making it unnecessarily complex, but has the same problem.
>>>>>>>> main correctly emulated by H never stops running unless aborted.
>>>>>>> HHH is unable to simulate main correctly, because it unable to
>>>>>>> simulate itself correctly.
>>>>>>> The 'unless phrase' is misleading, because we are talking about a H
>>>>>>> *does* abort. Dreaming of one that does not abort, is irrelevant.
>>>>>>> The correctly simulated main would stop, because the simulated H is
>>>>>>> only one cycle away from its return when its simulation is aborted.
>>>>>> HHH is required to report on what would happen if HHH did not abort.
>>>>>> HHH is forbidden from getting its own self stuck in infinite
>>>>>> execution. Emulated instances of itself is not its actual self.
>>>>> No. HHH is simulating itself, not a different function that does not
>>>>> abort. All calls are instances of the same code with the same
>>>>> parameters. They all do the same thing: aborting.
>>>> HHH always meets its abort criteria first because it always sees at
>>>> least one fully execution trace of DDD before the next inner one. It
>>>> is stupidly incorrect to think that HHH can wait on the next one.
>>> Stupidly incorrect is thinking that the next one wouldn’t abort just
>>> because that part isn’t simulated.
>> Unless the outermost one aborts none of them do.
> Since the outermost aborts, all of them do.
> 

This the same same as saying the when everyone in
a foot race is in single file and 15 feet behind
the one in front of them that everyone will come
in first place. No you are wrong.

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