Path: ...!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
Subject: Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the
 execution trace
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:15:09 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <v82aae$39v6n$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v80h07$2su8m$3@dont-email.me>
 <0amdndFJSZSzYD77nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:15:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f623e9acbcbdce9334ab4c51e72f5f6";
	logging-data="3472599"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ynMeKZ3dz8nL+zvVtVGgO"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NQQuroZasyL4ub244zvU8nNeUFw=
In-Reply-To: <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3414

Op 26.jul.2024 om 22:14 schreef olcott:
> On 7/26/2024 2:46 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 26/07/2024 16:56, olcott wrote:
>>> This is meant for Mike, Joes and Fred don't have the technical 
>>> competence to understand it.
>>>
>>> Richard might be able to understand it yet the fact that he is
>>> stuck in rebuttal mode makes any understanding that he may have
>>> utterly useless.
>>>
>>> Mike: It seems that HHH has been a pure function of its inputs
>>> and never has provided data downward to its slaves that corrupts
>>> their halt status decision. They don't even make a halt status
>>> decision thus cannot make a corrupted one.
>>
>> Well, the first two claims are literally untrue - outer HHH 
>> effectively uses the static mutable data to pass flags to the inner 
>> HHH that modify its behaviour.  The Root flag below is derived from 
>> the actual static data and causes inner HHH to totally skip its own 
>> abort logic!
>>
>> You seem to acknowledge this, but claim it does not matter for various 
>> reasons, because whatever mistakes you are making, what finally gets 
>> printed out is saying the right thing!
>>
> 
> If HHH gets the correct answer in an impure way then it only
> counts that it gets it in an impure way if it is impossible
> to get in a pure way. 

But the problem is that it gets the incorrect answer.
     if (!Root)
would be better, because then the simulator would indeed simulate an 
aborting and halting HHH and we would see that it gets the correct 
answer: halting.
But better is still wrong, because HHH s passing information to its 
simulated HHH, therefore, effectively it is simulating another HHH than 
*itself*.
You only prove that HHH cannot possibly simulate *itself* correctly.
In your example HHH is simulating another HHH.

You never proved that it is possible to get it in a pure way.
If it would be possible to do this in a pure way, then it would also 
possible to make an HHH that runs five cycles as Root and two cycles 
when not root, which would also get the correct answer.
In fact when such a construction is possible, it would be valid not only 
to skip a few lines when not Root, but also do completely different 
thing depending on root.
This al shows that you are completely off the road.