Sujet : Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---x86 code is a liar?
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 12. Nov 2024, 08:15:21
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <fd720871dd9e899c5ae2ae94388b131e4ecf5152@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Mon, 11 Nov 2024 22:05:55 -0600 schrieb olcott:
On 11/11/2024 11:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 11/11/24 11:35 AM, olcott wrote:
On 11/11/2024 10:25 AM, joes wrote:
Am Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:58:02 -0600 schrieb olcott:
On 11/11/2024 4:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-11-09 14:36:07 +0000, olcott said:
On 11/9/2024 7:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-11-08 14:41:57 +0000, olcott said:
On 11/8/2024 3:57 AM, joes wrote:
Am Thu, 07 Nov 2024 15:56:31 -0600 schrieb olcott:
On 11/7/2024 3:24 PM, joes wrote:
Am Thu, 07 Nov 2024 10:31:41 -0600 schrieb olcott:
On 11/7/2024 5:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 11/6/24 11:39 PM, olcott wrote:
The actual computation itself does involve HHH emulating itself
emulating DDD. To simply pretend that this does not occur seems
dishonest.
Which is what you are doing: you pretend that DDD calls some other
HHH that doesn’t abort.
DDD emulated by HHH does not reach its "return" instruction final halt
state whether HHH aborts its emulation or not.
HOW STUPID CAN POSSIBLY YOU BE?
WHEN I CORRECT YOU DOZENS OF TIMES YOU KEEP MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE.
But the emulation by HHH isn't the measure that a Decider is supposed
to use,
DDD emulated by HHH SPECIFIES THAT HHH MUST emulate itself emulating
DDD.
DDD emulated by HHH1 SPECIFIES THAT HHH1 MUST NOT emulate itself
emulating DDD.
You can leave out the "emulated by". It says right in the code of DDD
what should be simulated.
-- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
…