Re: D simulated by H unproved for THREE YEARS ---

Am Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:36:44 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/10/2024 10:25 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:36:09 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/10/2024 3:35 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 09 Jun 2024 22:54:52 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 5/29/2021 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:

 

THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY for D simulated by H to have the same behavior
as the directly executed D(D) is for the instructions of D to be
incorrectly simulated by H (details provided below).

The only correct simulation must simulate incorrectly? Wat.

Try carefully studying those words again and again until you see how
your paraphrase is wrong.

Perhaps you can paraphrase it better?
A simulator MUST have the same behaviour.

H does not ignore that instruction and simulates itself simulating D.
The directly executed D(D) reaps the benefit of D simulated by H
proving that *its input never halts*

If that simulation is right, D(D) never halts.

Because the H(D,D) that D(D) calls recognizes the its input DOES NOT
HALT, it aborts the simulation of this input causing the directly
executed D(D) to halt.

Simulating something most definitely does NOT cause any change in
its behaviour.
If the abortion causes D to halt, how could H detect D not to?
If D halts, it does so whether it is simulated or not.

How can H report "non-halting" when D(D) halts?

I proved that D simulated by H can only have the same behavior as the
directly executed D(D) when D is simulated by H incorrectly.

You've got it the wrong way around. A simulation must have the same
behaviour.

I proved otherwise. Maybe the proof is simply over-your-head?

Your simulator does not simulate if it has different behaviour.

--
joes