Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: Anyone that claims this is not telling the truth
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 17:17:05 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <v9r7h1$1tedb$42@dont-email.me>
References: <v9q52r$1tedb$1@dont-email.me> <v9qeed$1tedb$12@dont-email.me>
 <116cb41843f55511cf8fa5c2216083136e50c976@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qg05$1tedb$14@dont-email.me>
 <b8d7322ff586ee2776ced1a09090df787d889791@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qmci$1tedb$23@dont-email.me>
 <624e9a80190b25bac34b8e9ddf095ae1c4aa65d6@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qneu$1tedb$26@dont-email.me>
 <5aeaac6d89bca36e2e2564a2e60b6ed346839aab@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qp4p$1tedb$29@dont-email.me>
 <f742232fdc754b4d1998fbe57d4cbc8b6d07579d@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qqpj$1tedb$31@dont-email.me>
 <b1c1fc46c760d4764d3d1c529b4ae89b34ce69f5@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qs0r$1tedb$32@dont-email.me>
 <c123b309a16a59970eda679a6d381a220999c0d2@i2pn2.org>
 <v9r04b$1tedb$35@dont-email.me>
 <194ac945e5d201e9e82279156a4cd93bf55dcb1c@i2pn2.org>
 <v9r1u2$1tedb$36@dont-email.me>
 <3fd8b24c808a19e3669680c81bf4272902a7cc7a@i2pn2.org>
 <v9r3av$1tedb$38@dont-email.me>
 <dd1b2bfab5dca6151752b6daaf0e421bd56e18d2@i2pn2.org>
 <v9r5i1$1tedb$40@dont-email.me>
 <c438f76aa9e80012a17a73bd404eb06b793df352@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 00:17:06 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="126bd7503554732891ee2e704ffb1b5d";
	logging-data="2013611"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX198Xq16Dp2R2z7P1NMbbEQK"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:foyYGYb1qu5M/Ixja6ue0JTWRjg=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <c438f76aa9e80012a17a73bd404eb06b793df352@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 6177

On 8/17/2024 5:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/24 5:43 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2024 4:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/24 5:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2024 4:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/24 4:41 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 3:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 4:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 2:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>  > On 8/17/24 3:00 PM, olcott wrote:>> On 8/17/2024 1:50 PM, 
>>>>>>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>  >>>>>> And thus ALL of memory is part of the input,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any additional details have no effect what-so-ever on my claim.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Suure it does.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since your argument tries to say that since DDD is the same to 
>>>>>>>>> all of them, so its the behavior.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are just admitting to being a LIAR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Calling me a liar admits that insults is all that you have*
>>>>>>>> *If I made a mistake then show that*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FOR THREE YEARS YOU ALWAYS CHEAT
>>>>>>>> BY CHANGING MY WORDS AND REBUTTING THESE CHANGED WORDS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Everything that is not expressly stated below is*
>>>>>>>> *specified as unspecified*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret
>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *It is a basic fact that DDD emulated by HHH according to*
>>>>>>>> *the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly stop*
>>>>>>>> *running unless aborted* (out of memory error excluded)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, DDD can NOT be emulated accoreding to the semantics of the 
>>>>>>> x86 langauge, because the contents of the location 000015d2 is 
>>>>>>> not provided to be emulated, and will need to be emulated after 
>>>>>>> emulating the call instruction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Everything that is logically entailed by the above specification
>>>>>> is included by reference. The assumption that DDD and HHH were
>>>>>> not in the same memory space has always been ridiculous.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I guess you accept that every different HHH generates a 
>>>>> DIFFERENT Input, as that input, BY LOGHICAL NECESSITY includes all 
>>>>> the code of HHH so it can be emulated, and thus you claims that 
>>>>> "All the DDDs have the same bytes" is just a blantent lie.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is my only claim
>>>> *It is a basic fact that DDD emulated by HHH according to*
>>>> *the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly stop*
>>>> *running unless aborted* (out of memory error excluded)
>>>>
>>>> I am not claiming anything about any bytes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> And, as I point out, that isn't true if HHH ever aborts its simulation.
>>>
>>
>> That is merely agreeing with what I said
>>
>> X = DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 language
>> Y = HHH never aborts its emulation of DDD
>> Z = DDD never stops running
>>
>> I said: (X ∧ Y) ↔ Z
>> You said ~Y which entails ~Z just like I said.
>>
>> I had to rewrite that a bunch of times.
>>
> 
> But, that also means that you have agreed that this only hold is HHH 
> doesn't EVER abort its emulaiton, 

In the same way that
X = when you are starving hungry
Y = never eat
Z = you will die
(X ∧ Y) ↔ Z
remains true yet does not hold in the case of ~X ∨ ~Y.

You never actually refuted (X ∧ Y) ↔ Z
You simply started with ~Y.

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