Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis ---SUCCINCT
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 08:09:42 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 140
Message-ID: <vha936$1md4$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vh4ti4$2qj8g$1@dont-email.me>
 <4524b9dcb46740847649bcb907a87acbac1d00da@i2pn2.org>
 <vh5e3t$2tvu0$1@dont-email.me>
 <9b99b4dfe14296c74eeebd76b13369648e9e6059@i2pn2.org>
 <vh5fsd$2tvu0$2@dont-email.me>
 <a39b254c0aa0260206e0c21419993ea84007f765@i2pn2.org>
 <vh5hmo$2v2hi$1@dont-email.me>
 <8ee04a00a23875dac3d741882bffbdcb81dd7acb@i2pn2.org>
 <vh5ils$2v8v9$1@dont-email.me>
 <9807cd8f9a43d7c9e9f13c6f113276cfd5f20b97@i2pn2.org>
 <vh5m5h$191h$1@news.muc.de> <vh5mh7$301h0$1@dont-email.me>
 <9e7d357b9e3959bb8394d9bf45e6161a7c9145aa@i2pn2.org>
 <vh6c68$33nek$2@dont-email.me>
 <0a0894cfd14377a9fcf89638c7705420507f571e@i2pn2.org>
 <vh8pas$3lqmu$1@dont-email.me>
 <463966aff896041f1ea77478554251554a6ef456@i2pn2.org>
 <vh93nj$3r8ig$1@dont-email.me>
 <9c41d73f0cda8f10434729bdbc0963a95582bd5d@i2pn2.org>
 <vh957l$3rg98$1@dont-email.me>
 <ae415d1a0f07aa76d9a0dd2ef1078ffeb9b03b32@i2pn2.org>
 <vh96c2$3rlks$1@dont-email.me>
 <20671ab52fff727d5bcad5a85db05c68774fbbc5@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 15:09:42 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="16729fe49be52c96931729700fb02df3";
	logging-data="55716"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19J/fhbnZZ4IHpJhEDqG+Jr"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zmGUCrqZZtgA+cqevYR8VQV46tQ=
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <20671ab52fff727d5bcad5a85db05c68774fbbc5@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241116-2, 11/16/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 7435

On 11/16/2024 6:36 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/15/24 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 11/15/2024 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 11/15/24 10:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 11/15/2024 9:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 11/15/24 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/15/2024 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/15/24 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 2:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/24 3:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 2:22 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> joes <noreply@example.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What are weasel words?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Words whose precise meaning is difficult/impossible to pin 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> down, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately so.  Politicians use these all the time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _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]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its "ret"
>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction final halt state.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But the emulation by HHH is NOT the DEFINITION of the 
>>>>>>>>>>> behavior that HHH is suppoded to be reporting on.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Right and likewise ZFC is "supposed to include" sets that
>>>>>>>>>> are members of themselves. Thus according to your reasoning
>>>>>>>>>> ZFC is wrong because is directly disobeys the dogma of
>>>>>>>>>> naive set theory.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Where did I say that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You seem to be halucinationg.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That behavior that HHH is supposed to be reporting on is the 
>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the actual direct exectution of the program 
>>>>>>>>>>> described by the input, 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> IN OTHER WORDS YOU ARE SAYING THAT HHH SHOULD STUPIDLY IGNORE
>>>>>>>>>> THE FACT THAT DDD DOES SPECIFY THAT HHH MUST EMULATE ITSELF
>>>>>>>>>> EMULATING DDD
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> DDD doesn't "say" anything, it is a program that defines how it 
>>>>>>>>> will run.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must
>>>>>>>> emulate itself emulating DDD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no "emulate" instruction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must do as 
>>>>>>> it is programmed, and that the correct emulation of it will do 
>>>>>>> EXACTLY the same thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When HHH <is> an x86 emulator
>>>>>> (are you too stupid to remember this?) Then
>>>>>> The semantics of the x86 language specifies that HHH must
>>>>>> emulate itself emulating DDD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But it *ISN'T* one if it stops its emulation before it reaches the 
>>>>> final end.
>>>>>
>>>> Sure it is you are just a liar.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You got a source to back up your claim, 
>>
>> Full source-code backs up my claim you schmuck.
>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
>>
> 
> Which just prove that you are nothing but a LIAR.
> 
> You agree, that "Truth" comes from steps from those basic truths that 
> build the system, the Axioms of the system.
> 
> Your "Source Code", is NOT an axiom of the system.
> 

_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]

The axioms of the system are the x86 language nitwit.
HHH applies to axioms to its input proving that DDD
emulated by HHH cannot possibly ever reach its own
"ret" instruction final halt state no matter what
any partial or compete x86 emulator HHH does.

That most all that you have is lies and call me a liar
on this basis might get you condemned to actual Hell.
I hope not that is why I ask you to repent.

> Thus, it can't be the SOURCE of your assertions.
> 
> You don't even understand what you source code says, as has been pointed 
> out before, the semantics of x86 code REQUIRE that a full execution or 
> emulation be done, 

That is a lie. The semantics of the x86 language requires that
a partial or complete emulator never diverges from the meaning
that the code specifies.

When DDD emulated by HHH reaches the point where HHH would emulate
itself emulating DDD again it can correctly stop. What it cannot
do is ignore the call to itself and jmp to the "ret" instruction.


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