Path: ...!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: Any honest person that knows the x86 language can see... predict
 correctly
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:02:26 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <v8djm3$1kii7$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v887np$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>
 <v8bl2j$16ibk$2@dont-email.me>
 <9598b8ea0c68296492a4756938aefd1cec99df2a@i2pn2.org>
 <v8d527$1i7t1$1@dont-email.me>
 <3b9e705ebb74c4b330ecd39a954c79800dcf7660@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:02:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d6c56e3cc0e766a5f243fbbf3db0d44a";
	logging-data="1722951"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19wTsw5rCMCdXOCwNkMl3MW"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2hRUbuRnWaU2rxzk0TIvo4ls59A=
In-Reply-To: <3b9e705ebb74c4b330ecd39a954c79800dcf7660@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3987

On 7/31/2024 9:16 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:52:54 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/31/2024 3:54 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Tue, 30 Jul 2024 16:13:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> 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:
>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>
>>> Yes, and that modification makes HHH not call itself
>> Not at all. It makes HHH stop aborting DDD.
>> So that HHH and DDD endlessly repeat.

> Commenting out a section changes the program. 
This conclusively proving that this section was required.

> You changed only the inner
> HHH's, not the outermost one, thus breaking the recursive simulation.
> 

Not at all. I simply disabled the abort and this resulted
in unlimited repetition non-halting behavior.

>>> but a different program. You'd need to also comment out the outermost
>>> abort; then it wouldn't halt, but if you change HHH to abort, you
>>> change all copies of it at the same time (to keep the recursive call
>>> structure).
>> If your name is Charlie and your leg gets amputated you are still
>> yourself, you don't get renamed to Bill.
> A program's identity changes with its code. It doesn't matter what I label
> it in the source. I can define different functions with the same name.
> 

To prove that a section of code is required we remove that
section and the resulting endless repetition proves that
the abort section was required to prevent the endless repetition.

To prove that a hot stove will burn your hand you place
your hand firmly on the bright red electric stove burner
and your hand is burned. Renaming yourself to not-burned
Tommy doesn't help.

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