Path: ...!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: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see... predict
 correctly
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 16:13:55 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <v8bl2j$16ibk$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v887np$gl15$1@dont-email.me> <v8a2j5$u4t6$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8asse$12hr3$2@dont-email.me> <v8aukp$12grj$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8b00m$12ojm$1@dont-email.me> <v8bchs$15ai5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8bh32$15une$1@dont-email.me>
 <d89f03c5a605f010ec3c83c50137b983dc85848e@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 23:13:55 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f90a0d55b5a8d8d362f50b9fb3171851";
	logging-data="1263988"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19YrXDNSYzK8zUbXtzXPN62"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:emxu8C7v6boNtFBIWKM375EvGRk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <d89f03c5a605f010ec3c83c50137b983dc85848e@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 3366

On 7/30/2024 4:07 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:05:54 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/30/2024 1:48 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 30.jul.2024 om 17:14 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 7/30/2024 9:51 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 30.jul.2024 om 16:21 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 7/30/2024 1:52 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-07-29 14:07:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HHH(Infinite_Recursion) and HHH(DDD) show the same non-halting
>>>>>>>> behavior pattern in their derived execution traces of their
>>>>>>>> inputs.
>>>>>>> Hard to believe as their behaviour is so different and you don't
>>>>>>> say what pattern the see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Its all in the part that you erased*
> 
>>>>> We all see the differences between these two.
>>>>
>>>> They both correctly predict behavior that must be aborted to prevent
>>>> the infinite execution of the simulating halt decider.
>>>>
>>> Except that the prediction for the second one is wrong. The simulation
>>> of an aborting and halting function, like HHH, does not need to be
>>> aborted.
>> I proved otherwise. When the abort code is commented out then it keeps
>> repeating again and again, thus conclusively proving that is must be
>> aborted or HHH never halts.
> But the abort is not commented out in the running code!
> 

I modified the original code by commenting out
the abort and it does endlessly repeat just like
HHH correctly predicted.

>>> This is proved when it is simulate by HHH1. HHH aborts after two
>>> recursions, which is not an infinite execution.
>>> We know you really, really wants it to be correct. So, you are cheating
>>> by suppressing part of the trace, in order to hide the conditional
>>> branch instructions in the second case. But no matter how much olcott
>>> wants it to be correct, or how many times olcott repeats that it is
>>> correct, it does not change the fact that such a simulation is
>>> incorrect
> 

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