Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 22:01:38 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <v9ob72$1hur2$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v9gv4k$4sc4$1@dont-email.me>
 <561f876601b0329c0260bac26f8b6dfb6e28647f@i2pn2.org>
 <v9h5af$9jn6$1@dont-email.me>
 <bdfcf881b9a9ce7e2bc197339d14a01beae1116d@i2pn2.org>
 <XYucnXqdgeWiVSH7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <b8a96bbfe0516cf99b6f38c23fb4eccc3810ee7e@i2pn2.org>
 <v9krc5$uqhs$1@dont-email.me> <v9l7hf$vao1$3@dont-email.me>
 <v9laed$113gd$2@dont-email.me>
 <EbecnaOe1ajC1yP7nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v9llh9$12l6c$2@dont-email.me> <v9mt9h$1bdeu$3@dont-email.me>
 <v9nev6$1dvef$2@dont-email.me>
 <TqucndEmmvrpASL7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v9o712$1h5u4$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 22:01:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="905ef987000159018ac19d993d3552cf";
	logging-data="1637218"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19C/PDubvmLS/Dt435GpHLC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:i1bn3CxDZrqL8/xySZdSarlnGcE=
In-Reply-To: <v9o712$1h5u4$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4291

Op 16.aug.2024 om 20:50 schreef olcott:
> On 8/16/2024 1:37 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 16/08/2024 12:59, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2024 1:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 15.aug.2024 om 21:39 schreef olcott:
>>>>
>>>> It is clear that olcott does not really read what I write. (Or is 
>>>> very short of memory.)
>>>> I never said such a thing.
>>>> I repeatedly told that the 
>>>
>>> *YOUR MISTAKE*
>>>> simulating HHH aborted when the simulated HHH had only one cycle to go.
>>> That is WRONG. The outermost directly executed HHH aborts
>>> as soon as it has seen enough of the emulated execution
>>> trace to correctly predict that an unlimited execution
>>> would never stop running.
>>>
>>> *With abort as soon as you know*
>>> *there is never one more cycle to go*
>>>
>>> *MIKES CORRECTION OF YOUR MISTAKE*
>>> On 8/14/2024 10:07 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>  > On 14/08/2024 08:43, joes wrote:
>>>  >> HHH simulates DDD    enter the matrix
>>>  >>    DDD calls HHH(DDD)    Fred: could be eliminated
>>>  >>    HHH simulates DDD    second level
>>>  >>      DDD calls HHH(DDD)    recursion detected
>>>  >>    HHH aborts, returns    outside interference
>>>  >>    DDD halts        voila
>>>  >> HHH halts
>>>  >
>>>  > You're misunderstanding the scenario?  If your simulated
>>>  > HHH aborts its simulation [line 5 above],
>>>
>>> *THIS PART RIGHT HERE*
>>>  > then the outer level H would have aborted its
>>>  > identical simulation earlier. You know that, right?
>>>
>>>  > [It's what people have been discussing
>>>  > here endlessly for the last few months! :) ]
>>>  >
>>>  > So your trace is impossible...
>>>  >
>>
>> I supposed that I should be annoyed that you deliberately ignore my 
>> request to stop misrepresting my views and opinions.  You /know/ I 
>> don't agree with how you're misusing my words - but you do it anyway.
>>
> 
> Both Joes and Fred seem to think that every HHH can wait for
> the next one to abort and one of them will still eventually
> abort.
Your English is very poor. I never said such a thing.
I said that HHH, when simulation *itself* fails to reach its end.
I also said that HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly.
Now you put words in my mouth about how HHH could be changed to be correct.
I will never make a suggestion about how HHH can be improved to be 
correct, because I understand that HHH cannot possibly simulate itself 
correctly. There is no way to make it correct. It does not help to wait, 
it is simply impossible to do it correctly.
Can you repeat what I say? There is no way to make a HHH that can 
simulate itself correctly.