Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:22:51 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <vu8c8c$r86g$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vs92l3$1fccq$5@dont-email.me>
 <vs93ae$1k9u2$1@dont-email.me> <vs9g5p$1v2n9$5@dont-email.me>
 <vs9gcg$20g2j$3@dont-email.me> <vs9h9o$23cav$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs9hh3$20g2j$6@dont-email.me> <vs9jie$23cav$4@dont-email.me>
 <vs9kb1$26cg5$2@dont-email.me> <vs9pni$27rl4$9@dont-email.me>
 <3ade9e84224ba9b99c7363e0e9b69181804b7daa@i2pn2.org>
 <vsc2fd$1vihj$2@dont-email.me>
 <e1da7d564873d36f88e119fbbbdafd8c6b0f675e@i2pn2.org>
 <vsc9o7$2bk3d$2@dont-email.me> <vsdkq5$3rdgv$1@dont-email.me>
 <vselj9$th5g$1@dont-email.me> <vsg0tj$2e09c$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsht0a$90ss$4@dont-email.me> <vsiurv$1estf$1@dont-email.me>
 <vskqim$378kj$7@dont-email.me> <vsla1h$1kf$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsn08o$1ltd2$5@dont-email.me>
 <b748de0dbba6d397f790f7112fbaf891a9550e30@i2pn2.org>
 <vth4pr$3in23$7@dont-email.me>
 <ee7f2cd7fb674e3a212e7f98514a82aee3a1141b@i2pn2.org>
 <vtk70r$2d98m$1@dont-email.me>
 <7d3fb4c3b3ef4773a1e411e3f44d9251581ac403@i2pn2.org>
 <vu87rj$nqg7$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:22:52 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="221625c8ee30a140870d84331232caab";
	logging-data="893136"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Hq4AqXfqrgzJ2JCTrGKjp"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:j0Fq8OOaumKzk+43w7+owa56x9k=
In-Reply-To: <vu87rj$nqg7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: nl, en-GB

Op 22.apr.2025 om 16:07 schreef olcott:
> On 4/22/2025 7:40 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Mon, 14 Apr 2025 18:50:52 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 4/14/2025 4:32 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:54:35 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 4/13/2025 9:46 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Thu, 03 Apr 2025 16:57:43 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 4/3/2025 1:32 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-03 02:08:22 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a truism that a correct x86 emulator would emulate
>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself emulating DDD whenever DDD calls this emulator with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>>>> Which does not agree or disagree with my comment nor say anything
>>>>>>>> about it,
>>>>>>>> and it doesn't clarify any aspect of your statement that i
>>>>>>>> commented.
>>>>>>>> If there is any indirect connection to anything relevant that
>>>>>>>> connection is not presented, leaving your response unconnected and
>>>>>>>> therefore irrelevant.
>>>>>>>> So you did not reply to the immediated context.
>>>>>>> THE FACT THAT DDD EMULATED BY HHH DOES NOT HALT IS NOT RELEVANT TO A
>>>>>>> CORRECT DECISION BY A HALT DECIDER?
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>> To clarify: that *HHH* does not simulate DDD halting has no bearing on
>>>> its direct execution.
>>> THE DIRECT EXECUTION IS NOT WHAT IT SEES THUS FORBIDDING IT FROM
>>> REPORTING ON THE DIRECT EXECUTION.
>> It sure ought to see the same thing the directly executing processor 
>> does.
>>
> 
> HHH cannot possibly see what HHH1.
> 

Yes, the programmer made HHH such that it cannot see the behaviour. This 
failure of HHH does not say anything about the behaviour specified by 
the input. According to the semantics of the x86 language, this input 
specifies a halting program, as proven by direct execution and 
world-class simulators. That HHH is unable to reach the end of this 
halting program, does not change the semantics of the x86 language.