Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.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 knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
 reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:52:21 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <v8m5a5$3kbok$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>
 <v8lkdb$3h16a$1@dont-email.me>
 <5ee8b34a57f12b0630509183ffbd7c07804634b3@i2pn2.org>
 <v8ll4v$3h8m2$1@dont-email.me>
 <cbde765b8f9e769930b6c8589556907a41d9c256@i2pn2.org>
 <v8lm80$3h8m2$3@dont-email.me>
 <7295d80cad171cd65cc39845362189aa88adca4f@i2pn2.org>
 <v8lr4u$3iali$1@dont-email.me>
 <c949dfc8c7354f19a3a3d31325ee9847be91f333@i2pn2.org>
 <v8lt59$3iali$2@dont-email.me>
 <74c4fe66234c5332f4ec6032bc55cc6c5f038aee@i2pn2.org>
 <v8lv3a$3j30t$1@dont-email.me>
 <9fb36dd006e570bf987f882a8310bc13e8fc04a7@i2pn2.org>
 <v8m331$3ju7r$1@dont-email.me>
 <3ecbe8eddd0f3644c7045e937ccaf6ddc1cdb3a9@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2024 22:52:22 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6697133516c971b81fd53169bb6a94ea";
	logging-data="3813140"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18asPrWPyMfZbCSKwkowtiC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RlfiTtnZeT3lcUm3fpjk0G4nPzY=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <3ecbe8eddd0f3644c7045e937ccaf6ddc1cdb3a9@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4113

On 8/3/2024 3:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/3/24 4:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/3/2024 3:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/3/24 3:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/3/2024 1:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/3/24 2:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/3/2024 1:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/3/24 1:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> Every DDD correctly emulated by any HHH for a finite or
>>>>>>>> infinite number of steps never reaches its own "return"
>>>>>>>> halt state.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. And you statment is just a incoherent statement, as no 
>>>>>>> partial simulaitoni for a finite number of steps is "correct".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words you are trying to get away with saying that
>>>>>> when N instructions are correctly emulated by HHH that none
>>>>>> of these correctly emulated instructions were correctly emulated.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I am saying that the result is NOT the final result that the 
>>>>> x86 semantics says will happen, because the x86 semantics says it 
>>>>> does not stop therme
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The x86 semantics says that DDD correctly emulated by HHH
>>>> never reaches its own halt state of "return" in any finite
>>>> or infinite number of steps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> But only if HHH DOES correct emulation that never aborts.
>>>
>>
>> The x86 semantics says that
>> *DDD correctly emulated by HHH*
> ...
>> *DDD correctly emulated by HHH*
>> never reaches its own halt state of
>> "return" in any finite
>> or infinite number of steps.
> 
> Yes, but only for an HHH that corectly emulates its input, which means 
> it never aborts, and only for the DDD that calls THAT HHH.

*No you damned liar it does not mean that*

It means that when 0 to infinity steps of DDD are
correctly emulated by its corresponding HHH not a
single DDD ever reaches its own halt state of "return".

This means that every HHH can take a wild guess that
its DDD does not halt and it would be correct because
we exhaustively covered every damn one of them.

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