Re: behavior and description --- Rebuttals have been pure bluster V3

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: behavior and description --- Rebuttals have been pure bluster V3
De : abc (at) *nospam* def.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 07. Aug 2024, 05:10:30
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v8uoj6$25e3e$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/6/2024 10:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/6/24 10:49 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/6/2024 9:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/6/24 9:48 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/6/2024 8:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/6/24 1:16 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/6/2024 12:02 PM, joes wrote:
Am Tue, 06 Aug 2024 09:43:30 -0500 schrieb olcott:
Understanding that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach
its own "return" instruction is a mandatory prerequisite to further
discussion.
>
There is nothing to discuss after agreeing with your conclusion.
>
Everyone remains convinced that HHH must report on the behavior of the
computation that itself is contained within and not the behavior that
its finite string input specifies.
>
The construction is not recursive if the description does not describe
the surrounding computation. And that behaviour cannot depend on the
decider, as they should all give the same answer.
>
>
That is far too vague.
>
DDD correctly emulated by HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 programming language specifies a single exact
sequence of state changes. None of these state changes
ends up at the x86 machine language address of the "ret"
instruction of DDD.
>
>
Which would be meaningful if HHH actual did a correct emulation of the
>
HHH does emulate the exact sequence that the machine code
of DDD specifies. This has been conclusively proven by
the execution traces that the two instances of HHH provide.
>
Nope, because it didn't emulate the call instruction properly.
>
>
It is proved that it does emulate the call instruction
properly by the correct execution trace of the second
DDD derived by the second HHH.
 Nope, just proves you don't know what you are talking about.
 
Because your rebuttals have always been pure bluster
you have only used double-talk and misdirection to dodge
pointing out any mistake in the following:
_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]
_main()
[00002192] 55         push ebp
[00002193] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
[00002195] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000219f] 83c404     add esp,+04
[000021a2] 50         push eax
[000021a3] 6843070000 push 00000743
[000021a8] e8b5e5ffff call 00000762
[000021ad] 83c408     add esp,+08
[000021b0] 33c0       xor eax,eax
[000021b2] 5d         pop ebp
[000021b3] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0034) [000021b3]
  machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
  address   address   data      code       language
  ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
[00002192][00103820][00000000] 55         push ebp
[00002193][00103820][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
[00002195][0010381c][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000219a][00103818][0000219f] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
New slave_stack at:1038c4
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
[00002172][001138bc][001138c0] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][001138bc][001138c0] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][001138b8][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
New slave_stack at:14e2ec
[00002172][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][0015e2e0][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][0015e2dc][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
[0000219f][00103820][00000000] 83c404     add esp,+04
[000021a2][0010381c][00000000] 50         push eax
[000021a3][00103818][00000743] 6843070000 push 00000743
[000021a8][00103818][00000743] e8b5e5ffff call 00000762
Input_Halts = 0
[000021ad][00103820][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
[000021b0][00103820][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
[000021b2][00103824][00000018] 5d         pop ebp
[000021b3][00103828][00000000] c3         ret
Number of Instructions Executed(10069) == 150 Pages
*I had no idea that Mike was doing this same thing*
The former editor in chief of CASM did acknowledge
this to me. He said that was why he couldn't understand
what I was saying after many email exchanges.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
6 Aug 24 * Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point26olcott
6 Aug 24 +* Re: behaviour and description18joes
6 Aug 24 i`* Re: behaviour and description17olcott
7 Aug 24 i `* Re: behaviour and description16Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i  `* Re: behaviour and description --- Trust Mike?15olcott
7 Aug 24 i   `* Re: behaviour and description --- Lying Peter14Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i    +* Re: behaviour and description --- Lying Peter2olcott
7 Aug 24 i    i`- Re: behaviour and description --- Lying Peter1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i    +* Re: behavior and description --- All Rebuttals have been pure bluster2olcott
7 Aug 24 i    i`- Re: behavior and description --- Peter Olcott's Rebuttals have been pure bluster1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i    `* Re: behavior and description --- All rebuttals have been pure bluster V39olcott
7 Aug 24 i     `* Re: behavior and description --- Peter Olcott's rebuttals have been pure bluster V38Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i      `* Re: behavior and description --- Rebuttals have been pure bluster V37olcott
7 Aug 24 i       `* Re: behavior and description --- Peter Olcott's Rebuttals have been pure bluster V36Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i        `* Re: behavior and description --- Richard still only has pure bluster5olcott
7 Aug 24 i         +* Re: behavior and description --- Peter still only has pure bluster and lies3Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 i         i`* Re: behavior and description --- All of the code is here it is just hard to find2olcott
8 Aug 24 i         i `- Re: behavior and description --- All of the code is here it is just hard to find (No its not, no HHH given)1Richard Damon
8 Aug 24 i         `- Re: behavior and description --- Richard still only has pure bluster1Mikko
7 Aug 24 +- Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point FAILED.1Richard Damon
7 Aug 24 +* Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point3Mikko
7 Aug 24 i`* Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point2olcott
8 Aug 24 i `- Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point1Mikko
7 Aug 24 `* Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point3Fred. Zwarts
7 Aug 24  `* Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point2olcott
8 Aug 24   `- Re: Latest revision of my paper incorporating feedback --- last remaining sticking point1Fred. Zwarts

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal