Path: ...!news.nobody.at!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: Pathological self-reference changes the semantics of the same
 finite string.
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 09:54:38 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <vartrv$da84$1@dont-email.me>
References: <va104l$376ed$4@dont-email.me> <va38qh$3ia79$1@dont-email.me>
 <7a1c569a699e79bfa146affbbae3eac7b91cd263@i2pn2.org>
 <va3f7o$3ipp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <729cc551062c13875686d266a5453a488058e81c@i2pn2.org>
 <va3kac$3nd5c$1@dont-email.me>
 <148bf4dd91f32379a6d81a621fb7ec3fc1e00db0@i2pn2.org>
 <va3lai$3nd5c$2@dont-email.me> <va46sd$3pr24$1@dont-email.me>
 <va4mle$3s0hu$1@dont-email.me>
 <5591ff08ed8f7b4bdf33813681e156b775efe0ec@i2pn2.org>
 <va63uu$2fo9$1@dont-email.me>
 <b0a86b6a1343ebb5f9112ae757768a7cbbc770b2@i2pn2.org>
 <va65r8$6ht7$1@dont-email.me>
 <da75188ffa7677bd2b6979c8fc6ba82119404306@i2pn2.org>
 <878qwn0wyz.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <efacnfsQdv-ErlT7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87le0jzc8f.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <vaj1kd$2kvg9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vamk31$3d76g$1@dont-email.me> <van30n$3f6c0$2@dont-email.me>
 <vap90d$3t06p$1@dont-email.me> <vaptvg$3vumk$2@dont-email.me>
 <vaqbo3$22im$2@dont-email.me> <vaqcj8$28ni$3@dont-email.me>
 <vaqdl9$22il$1@dont-email.me> <vaqf9d$2qu1$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 09:54:40 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c1e0bd1d1eb8fbe1ae40de0a50d6113d";
	logging-data="436484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1985NVyRvOS4YB8X1L5Fl4X"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wDWgNksHi3uSlBVn6gZOzA6/2LI=
In-Reply-To: <vaqf9d$2qu1$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4417

Op 29.aug.2024 om 20:39 schreef olcott:
> On 8/29/2024 1:11 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 29.aug.2024 om 19:53 schreef olcott:
> 
> On 8/29/2024 12:39 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>  >
>  > Olcott does not even understand what the semantics of
>  > the x86 language is. He thinks that a finite string can
>  > have different behaviours according to the semantics
>  > of the x86 language, depending on whether it is directly
>  > executed, or simulated by different simulators, where the
>  > semantics could be different for each simulator.
> 
>>> Pathological self-reference DOES CHANGE THE SEMANTICS.
>>> "This sentence is not true" is neither true nor false
>>> because it is not a truth bearer.
>>>
>>> This sentence is not true: "This sentence is not true"
>>> The exact same (finite string) sentence applied to a
>>> copy of itself becomes true because the inner sentence
>>> is not a truth-bearer.
>>
>> You are changing the subject to irrelevant other subjects.
> 
> I am provided a specific concrete counter-example that
> correctly refutes your claim that finite strings have
> the exact same meaning regardless of context.
> 
> It is incorrect to ignore context.
> You are incorrect to ignore context.
> 
> 

Sometimes context is important, but in the case of the semantics of the 
x86 language the counter example is irrelevant.
Your counter example is about a self reference, but in HHH there is no 
self reference.
Maybe *your* HHH has a self-reference, because its own address is 
programmed in it, but that is just an error in the programming of the code.
A correct decider processes its input, unaware of the fact whether that 
input contains a copy of its own algorithm.
Saying that HHH cannot answer that because it is a self-reference is the 
same as saying that the question "Does this person have blue eyes?" 
cannot be answered because it contains a self-reference if the person 
happens to be your twin brother.
The fact that the person is your twin brother and that you need eyes to 
see the colour does not make it a self-reference.
Similarly, when HHH decided about its *input*, there is no 
self-reference, even if the input uses the same algorithm as used inside 
HHH.

You are incorrect that the context would change the semantics of the x86 
language. The only evidence for your claim is an irrelevant counter-example.