Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:54:51 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <v8ff0b$22ouu$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v80h07$2su8m$3@dont-email.me> <0amdndFJSZSzYD77nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me> <v83fhe$3gihn$1@dont-email.me> <v83hmk$3gvj7$1@dont-email.me> <v83jc9$3gihm$1@dont-email.me> <v83juc$3ham9$1@dont-email.me> <v8519e$3s7bv$1@dont-email.me> <v88h9e$i7kl$7@dont-email.me> <v8a31r$u7n5$1@dont-email.me> <v8btl5$184u7$3@dont-email.me> <v8cval$1hf7s$1@dont-email.me> <v8dspd$1mg72$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 09:54:52 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cf6c3700573d19c81f9562406f33b929";
	logging-data="2188254"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19UL4rhwMXQ6b4JpQrehJU2"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:OkBF2fUDX+ZBKz9IHs5k0q+82nA=
Bytes: 3469

On 2024-07-31 17:37:49 +0000, olcott said:

> On 7/31/2024 4:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-07-30 23:40:21 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 7/30/2024 2:00 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-29 16:50:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 7/28/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-07-27 20:05:31 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>> If you had sufficient understanding of the x86 language
>>>>>>> you would know that DDD is correctly emulated by HHH.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you had suffient understanding of x86 language and correctness
>>>>>> you would know that DDD is incorrectly emnulated by HHH.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is only seems that way because every reviewer makes sure
>>>>> to ignore one aspect of the basis of another.
>>>> 
>>>> It is perfectly OK to ignore irrelevant details. A relevant detail
>>>> is the meaning of the word "emulate" as that determines what is a
>>>> correct emulation and what is not.
>>> 
>>> *It is not OK to ignore*
>>> 
>>> This algorithm is used by all the simulating termination analyzers:
>>> <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>
>>> 
>>> for DDD correctly emulated by HHH until...
>> 
>> It is as Sipser does not say whether DDD is correctly simulated by HHH
>> or what would constitute a correct simulation.
>> 
>> What is relevant is that the emolator program in HHH contains details
>> that are not specified by the x86 language.
>> 
> 
> It seems that every time I completely prove my point you
> change the subject to another point that I have already
> completely proven.

Hard to tell as you never prove anything. Of course everthing is true about
someting that never happens but that kind of thruth has no significance.

-- 
Mikko