Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan --- Ben's agreement

On 7/5/24 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:

On 7/5/2024 10:48 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 05.jul.2024 om 16:05 schreef olcott:

On 7/5/2024 8:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

>
HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself.
>

LIAR! I give up on you.
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf

>
No need to come back, because you are unable to point to any error in my reasoning.

 I conclusively proved that HHH is correctly simulating itself
simulating DDD and you simply freaking lie about it.

Then why didn't it see that HHH it was simulating returning?

 

Your replies are only irrelevant, or supporting my reasoning. I showed that HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly and your full trace supports this, as it shows that the simulating HHH is unable to reach the 'ret' of the simulated HHH.
>

 *Unable to reach ret IS A FREAKING CORRECT FREAKING SIMULATION*
The machine code specifies that DDD simulated by HHH according
to the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly reach the
ret instruction of DDD or its correctly simulated self.

Nope. not if you only didn't reach the return because you stoppped simulating.
Since the input has a copy of the exact same program as you are, if YOU abort your simulation, so does it, and thus you were WRONG to abort.
You aren't the non-aborting program you assume program you assume the input is calling, and thus it isn't either.
The source of the problem is you keep on thinking you are actually simulating a template, but you can't be, because you had to instantiate the template have what you needed to simulate it, so the code of the HHH was LOCKED to THIS HHH, and doesn't change when you hypotonsize what would happen if your instsnce didn't abort (which you can't actually express in your code base except by making a totally different copy of HHH, called like HHH1, with the diffrence (if any) and have that simulate the code. And if HHH1 does a full simulation, it sees that DDD calls HHH which will eventually decider to abort (since that is the decision you finally made for your design of HHH) and then HHH return to DDD and DDD return and Halt.

 _DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
 

You are just showing your total ignorance of the field you are claiming to be making massive discovers in, showing you are actually just stupid.