Path: ...!news.mixmin.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
Subject: Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the
 execution trace
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 20:50:21 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <v83fhe$3gihn$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 20:50:23 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f623e9acbcbdce9334ab4c51e72f5f6";
	logging-data="3689015"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Kzx89nBnn2KybmRdgB3PA"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BoyGND9yERkZxYJNk+kNoV3ZjPY=
In-Reply-To: <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3489

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. This makes it possible for HHH to get
> this answer in a pure way:
> 
> Message-ID: <rLmcnQQ3-N_tvH_4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
> On 3/1/2024 12:41 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>  >
>  > Obviously a simulator has access to the internal state
>  > (tape contents etc.) of the simulated machine. No problem there.
> 

Mike Terry is right that a simulator has access to the internal state of 
the simulated machine, but he did not say that it is correct to *change 
in this way* the state of the simulated machine.
Changing the state of the simulated machine is cheating. Of course a 
simulator can modify the input before of during the simulation. It can 
change instructions, it can change the value of variable (such as Root).
However, it is clear that when it simulates a modified input, it is no 
longer simulating its input.
This is what happens when the simulator changes the value of Root. It 
changes the (hidden) input of the simulated machine, so that the 
simulator does no longer simulate the input, but something else.