Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?

On 5/20/2024 10:17 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:

Am 20.05.2024 um 16:51 schrieb olcott:
 

Anyone having sufficient knowledge of the semantics
knows the answer. Likewise for these C functions:
>
void Infinite_Recursion(u32 N)
{
   Infinite_Recursion(N);
}
>
int factorial(int n)
{
   if (n >= 1)
     return n*factorial(n-1);
   else
     return 1;
}
>
void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
}
>
>

 I can't believe you're a professional developer when you repeatedly
run into the wall with simple questions like this for years.

I have known the answer from an actual execution trace for years.
Anyone with sufficient knowledge of the semantics of the C language
knows the answer. *I just need several liars to be put in their place*
That P is correctly simulated by H is proven by the fact that
every assembly language instruction of P is correctly simulated
by H in the order specified by the x86 assembly language of P
even when H correctly simulates itself simulating P.
All of the details of this (except the 354 page execution
trace of H) are shown on pages 4-5 of the following paper.
*My 2021-09-26 09:39 AM paper*
*Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation*
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351947980_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation --
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer