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: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 16:35:20 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <v8bmao$16ibk$4@dont-email.me>
References: <v7gl30$3j9fi$1@dont-email.me> <v7led6$kacj$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7lsg5$luh0$5@dont-email.me> <v7nm9m$1433k$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7ofe7$17h8r$6@dont-email.me> <v7qfu0$1m6vf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v7r040$1onhe$3@dont-email.me> <v7vlbj$2ofet$1@dont-email.me>
 <v80a2u$2rabc$4@dont-email.me> <v825jo$39i9l$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 23:35:21 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f90a0d55b5a8d8d362f50b9fb3171851";
	logging-data="1263988"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IskORsTsxTCvNqoZpP0wQ"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0b818fp4rsC/42m6sNnxoUBpw68=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v825jo$39i9l$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3142

On 7/27/2024 1:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-07-26 13:58:54 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 7/26/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-24 13:38:08 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is off topic. I am only referring to  a sequence of
>>>> 1 to N x86 machine language instructions simulated according
>>>> to the x86 semantic meaning of these instructions.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't. Abortion of simulation is a deviation form x86 macine
>>> language semantics. What I ask about does not deviate more.
>>
>> In other words you are saying that it is absolutely impossible
>> to make an x86 program that is an x86 emulator that correctly
>> emulates a finite number of instructions of non-terminating
>> input x86 machine code.
> 
> You are lying again. That is not the same in other words, and I am
> not saying what you falsely claim.
> 
> If a simulator correctly simulates a finite number of instructions
> where x86 program specifies an execution of an infinite number of
> instructions then the simulation deviates from x86 semantics at the
> point where the simulation stops but the x86 semantics specify
> countinuation.
> 

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider *H correctly simulates its input D*
     *until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never*
     *stop running unless aborted* then

     H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

Since you knew that all along I can't take your reply above as
anything but a strawman deception attempt at rebuttal.


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