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: Hypothetical possibilities --- strawman deception
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 11:20:37 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <v8fggl$230t0$1@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> <v8bmao$16ibk$4@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 10:20:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cf6c3700573d19c81f9562406f33b929";
	logging-data="2196384"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18bThmohavnz4wL8n0Tig2V"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NN+4XNubfMk8Rf+9u4rYSBShwzc=
Bytes: 3334

On 2024-07-30 21:35:20 +0000, olcott said:

> 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.

That you cannot take my reply as what it is does not make my
reply anything other than what it is.

However, you should note that Sipser's agreement is not published in
a respectable publication you cannot use it in a publishable article.
Instead, you may quote what he has actually published.

-- 
Mikko