Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated by
 HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:03:55 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <v8lkdb$3h16a$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v8jh7m$30k55$1@dont-email.me> <v8kou4$3b2ta$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8lcir$3f6vr$4@dont-email.me> <v8ldcs$3fcgg$2@dont-email.me>
 <v8lem0$3ftpo$2@dont-email.me>
 <735401a612caec3eedb531311fd1e09b3d94521d@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2024 18:03:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6697133516c971b81fd53169bb6a94ea";
	logging-data="3704010"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX184QbQtZpm1gJySEcu3U+jM"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mrtwTvX6RNmaixpgfbRDe32QHZg=
In-Reply-To: <735401a612caec3eedb531311fd1e09b3d94521d@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3063

On 8/3/2024 10:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/3/24 10:26 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/3/2024 9:04 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 03.aug.2024 om 15:50 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 8/3/2024 3:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 02.aug.2024 om 22:57 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> Who here is too stupid to know that DDD correctly simulated
>>>>>> by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which proves that the simulation is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> When are you going to understand that you are not allowed
>>>> to disagree with the semantics of the x86 language?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I do not disagree.
>>> When are you going to understand that it is a deviation of the 
>>> semantics of the x86 language to skip instructions of a halting program,
>>
>> HHH(DDD) simulates DDD that calls HHH(DDD) to repeat the process.
>>
>> If it does this an infinite number of times the simulated DDD
>> never reaches its own return instruction.
>>
>> If it does this a googolplex number of times the simulated DDD
>> never reaches its own return instruction.
> 
> Nope, the PARTIAL SIMULATION of DDD never reaches the return instruction.
> 

For N = 0; while N <= googolplex; N++
N instructions of DDD correctly emulated by HHH[N] never
reach their own "return" instruction final state.

∞ instructions of DDD correctly emulated by HHH[∞] never
reach their own "return" instruction final state.

Thus any HHH that takes a wild guess that DDD emulated
by itself never halts is always correct.

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