Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD incorrectly simulated by HHH

On 6/28/2024 2:25 PM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:24:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/28/2024 11:28 AM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:01:41 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/28/2024 9:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 28.jun.2024 om 16:12 schreef olcott:

On 6/28/2024 3:06 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 27.jun.2024 om 19:21 schreef olcott:

>

The call from DDD to H0(DDD) when DDD is correctly emulated by x86
emulator H0 cannot possibly return.

That is counter-factual. HHH(DDD) does correctly emulate the call from
DDD to HHH(DDD) emulating itself emulating DDD.

You are really immune to contradictions, are you?
 

HHH correctly emulates DDD including emulating itself emulating DDD and
sees that this proves that DDD is stuck in recursive simulation thus
aborts DDD and correctly returns 0 indicating it has rejected its input
according to this criterion:

If it were able to correctly simulate itself it would see that its
recursive call also aborts, and could accept DDD as halting.
 

*You might just be too dumb to comprehend this*
<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>
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer