Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten

On 6/12/2024 2:46 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 12.jun.2024 om 21:20 schreef olcott:

On 6/12/2024 2:13 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 12.jun.2024 om 20:24 schreef olcott:

On 6/12/2024 1:19 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 12.jun.2024 om 16:47 schreef olcott:

>
There is no infinite nested simulation detected,

>
If I am wrong then a specific sequence of steps of D correctly
simulated by H where D terminates normally can be provided.

>
No infinite execution has been detected,

>
You seem to simply not understand that D correctly simulated
by H would eventually crash due to out-of-memory error.
>

>
Exactly. A correct H simulated by H does not exist. But, again, you misses the point. It was in the part that you omitted.
So, again:
>
No infinite execution has been detected, only a premature abortion.

>
On 5/29/2021 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/dTvIY5NX6b4/m/cHR2ZPgPBAAJ
>
If that was true then you could provide every step of D correctly
simulated by H such that D simulated by H reaches its own simulated
"ret" instruction.

 I said that each H is unable to hit its target, so how could it reach the "ret" instruction of D? Please, think before you reply.

It is a binary choice either D correctly simulated by H can
possibly terminate normally by reaching its "ret" instruction
or not. Your attempt to twist these words to make it look like
there is more than these two possibilities is either ignorant
or deceptive.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer