Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace

On 2024-07-30 23:40:21 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/30/2024 2:00 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-29 16:50:53 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 7/28/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-27 20:05:31 +0000, olcott said:

If you had sufficient understanding of the x86 language
you would know that DDD is correctly emulated by HHH.

 If you had suffient understanding of x86 language and correctness
you would know that DDD is incorrectly emnulated by HHH.

 This is only seems that way because every reviewer makes sure
to ignore one aspect of the basis of another.

 It is perfectly OK to ignore irrelevant details. A relevant detail
is the meaning of the word "emulate" as that determines what is a
correct emulation and what is not.

 *It is not OK to ignore*
 This algorithm is used by all the simulating termination analyzers:
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider *H correctly simulates its input D*
     *until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never*
     *stop running unless aborted* then
      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
     specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
 for DDD correctly emulated by HHH until...

It is as Sipser does not say whether DDD is correctly simulated by HHH
or what would constitute a correct simulation.
What is relevant is that the emolator program in HHH contains details
that are not specified by the x86 language.
--
Mikko