Re: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the execution trace

On 7/28/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-27 20:05:31 +0000, olcott said:

If you had sufficient understanding of the x86 language
you would know that DDD is correctly emulated by HHH.

 If you had suffient understanding of x86 language and correctness
you would know that DDD is incorrectly emnulated by HHH.
 

This is only seems that way because every reviewer makes sure
to ignore one aspect of the basis of another.
<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>
_DDD()
[00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
[00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d         pop ebp
[00002174] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
DDD is correctly emulated by HHH until HHH correctly
determines that
  *its simulated DDD would never stop running unless aborted*
  *its simulated DDD would never stop running unless aborted*
  *its simulated DDD would never stop running unless aborted*
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer