Path: ...!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: Pathological self-reference changes the meaning of the same
 finite string
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 08:07:26 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 118
Message-ID: <vav4ie$10jsm$6@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> <vaqngq$4acd$1@dont-email.me>
 <varve2$ds5d$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 15:07:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="704a0de50af0d27d19f59cdc9b0cd400";
	logging-data="1068950"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+vkYKPhffICoc90XwJp4jk"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1C5f5XZq+mLCSwA1u/OCN4E4mbI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <varve2$ds5d$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 6543

On 8/30/2024 3:21 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 29.aug.2024 om 23:00 schreef olcott:
>> On 8/29/2024 12:39 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 29.aug.2024 om 15:44 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 8/29/2024 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-08-28 11:51:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/28/2024 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> This group is for discussions about the theory of computation and 
>>>>>>> related
>>>>>>> topics. Discussion about people is off-topic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Try to point to the tiniest lack of clarity in this fully
>>>>>> specified concrete example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _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]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HHH computes the mapping from DDD to behavior that never reaches
>>>>>> its "return" statement on the basis of the x86 emulation of DDD
>>>>>> by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For all the  years people said that this simulation is incorrect
>>>>>> never realizing that they were disagreeing with the semantics
>>>>>> of the x86 language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now that I point this out all that I get for "rebuttal" is bluster
>>>>>> and double talk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The same thing applies to this more complex example that
>>>>>> is simply over-the-head of most reviewers:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice to see that you don't disagree.
>>>>> But you should not use subject lines that are off-topic for the group.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When a specific reviewer makes a specific mistake in
>>>> reviewing my work related to this group I must refer
>>>> to that specific reviewer's mistake to clear my name.
>>>>
>>>> I could generalize it. No one person here besides myself
>>>> sufficiently understands the details of how a simulating
>>>> halt decider computes the mapping from an input finite
>>>> string to the behavior that this finite sting specifies.
>>>
>>> It looks more that you are the only person that does not understand 
>>> these details, but who thinks that his dreams are a nice substitute 
>>> for facts.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I specifically referred to Ben because he got everything
>>>> else correctly. Most everyone else cannot even understand
>>>> that correct simulation is defined by HHH emulating DDD
>>>> according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> It is well understood in linguistics that the context of an
>> expression DOES CHANGE THE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION.
> 
> For some languages this is true, but not for the x86 language.
> The specification of the semantics of the x86 language nowhere allows a 
> different interpretation depending on the context.
> 

For Turing machine deciders it is true:

WST Workshop on Termination, Oxford, 2018 0
Objective and Subjective Specifications
Eric C.R. Hehner
Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/OSS.pdf

"Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this (yes/no) question?"
This is an incorrect YES/NO question when posed to Carol
because both YES and NO are the wrong answer when posed
to Carol.

Is isomorphic to:
Can a Turing machine decider H return a correct Boolean value 
corresponding to the actual behavior of an input D encoded to
do the opposite of whatever value is returned?

This is an incorrect Boolean question when posed to H because
both TRUE and FALSE are the wrong answer when posed to H.

CONTEXT MATTERS EVEN TO TURING MACHINES

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