Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 16. Aug 2024, 04:24:57
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v9md9p$19n30$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/15/2024 8:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/15/24 8:12 AM, olcott wrote:
On 8/15/2024 2:00 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 14 Aug 2024 16:07:43 +0100 schrieb Mike Terry:
On 14/08/2024 08:43, joes wrote:
Am Tue, 13 Aug 2024 21:38:07 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 8/13/2024 9:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/13/24 8:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>
A simulation of N instructions of DDD by HHH according to the
semantics of the x86 language is necessarily correct.
Nope, it is just the correct PARTIAL emulation of the first N
instructions of DDD, and not of all of DDD,
That is what I said dufuss.
You were trying to label an incomplete/partial/aborted simulation as
correct.
>
A correct simulation of N instructions of DDD by HHH is sufficient
to correctly predict the behavior of an unlimited simulation.
Nope, if a HHH returns to its caller,
*Try to show exactly how DDD emulated by HHH returns to its caller*
how *HHH* returns
>
HHH simulates DDD    enter the matrix
    DDD calls HHH(DDD)    Fred: could be eliminated HHH simulates
DDD
    second level
      DDD calls HHH(DDD)    recursion detected
    HHH aborts, returns    outside interference DDD halts
voila
HHH halts
>
You're misunderstanding the scenario?  If your simulated HHH aborts its
simulation [line 5 above],

then the outer level H would have aborted its identical simulation
earlier.  You know that, right?
That is the part that Joes and Fred do not understand.
--
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
14 Aug 24 * Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point163olcott
14 Aug 24 +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point141Richard Damon
14 Aug 24 i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point140olcott
14 Aug 24 i +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point45Richard Damon
14 Aug 24 i i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point44olcott
14 Aug 24 i i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point43Richard Damon
14 Aug 24 i i  +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point32olcott
14 Aug 24 i i  i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point31Richard Damon
14 Aug 24 i i  i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head30olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i  +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head28Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head27olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head20Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head19olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head18Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head17olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head16Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i    +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head11olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head10Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head9olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i  +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Fred. Zwarts
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head7Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head6olcott
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i    +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i    `* Re: point by point --- in our head4joes
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i     `* Re: point by point --- in our head3olcott
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i      +- Re: point by point --- in our head1joes
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i    i      `- Re: point by point --- in our head1Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head4olcott
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i     `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head3Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    i      `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head2olcott
16 Aug 24 i i  i    i       `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i i  i    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head6Mikko
15 Aug 24 i i  i     `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head5olcott
16 Aug 24 i i  i      +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head3Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i  i      i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head2olcott
16 Aug 24 i i  i      i `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i  i      `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point --- in our head1Mikko
15 Aug 24 i i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point10Mikko
15 Aug 24 i i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point9olcott
16 Aug 24 i i    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point8Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i     `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point7olcott
16 Aug 24 i i      `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point6Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i i       `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point5olcott
16 Aug 24 i i        +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point2joes
16 Aug 24 i i        i`- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1olcott
16 Aug 24 i i        +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1Mikko
16 Aug 24 i i        `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1Richard Damon
14 Aug 24 i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point94joes
14 Aug 24 i  +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point3olcott
14 Aug 24 i  i+- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1joes
14 Aug 24 i  i`- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1Fred. Zwarts
14 Aug 24 i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point90Mike Terry
14 Aug 24 i   +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point1olcott
15 Aug 24 i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point88joes
15 Aug 24 i    +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes85olcott
15 Aug 24 i    i+* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes74Fred. Zwarts
15 Aug 24 i    ii`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes73olcott
15 Aug 24 i    ii +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes1Fred. Zwarts
15 Aug 24 i    ii `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes71Mike Terry
15 Aug 24 i    ii  +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes2olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii  i`- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes1Fred. Zwarts
15 Aug 24 i    ii  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too68olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii   +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too2Mike Terry
16 Aug 24 i    ii   i`- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too1olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too65Fred. Zwarts
16 Aug 24 i    ii    +* Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too15olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii    i+* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too13Mike Terry
16 Aug 24 i    ii    ii`* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too12olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii    ii +- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1joes
16 Aug 24 i    ii    ii +- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i    ii    ii +- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1Fred. Zwarts
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii `* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too8Mike Terry
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii  +* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too4Mike Terry
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii  i`* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too3olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii  i +- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1joes
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii  i `- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1Richard Damon
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii  `* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too3olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii   `* Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too2Fred. Zwarts
17 Aug 24 i    ii    ii    `- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii    i`- Re: Mike's correction of Joes correct Fred too1Fred. Zwarts
16 Aug 24 i    ii    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too49Mike Terry
16 Aug 24 i    ii     +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts16olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii     i+* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts14Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i    ii     ii`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts13olcott
16 Aug 24 i    ii     ii +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts8Richard Damon
16 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts7olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts6Richard Damon
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts5olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i   `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts4Richard Damon
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts3olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i     `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts2Richard Damon
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii i      `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts1olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii +- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts1Mikko
17 Aug 24 i    ii     ii `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts3joes
18 Aug 24 i    ii     ii  `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts2olcott
18 Aug 24 i    ii     ii   `- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts1Richard Damon
17 Aug 24 i    ii     i`- Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- reviewers disagree with basic facts1Fred. Zwarts
16 Aug 24 i    ii     `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too32Jeff Barnett
16 Aug 24 i    ii      +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too4olcott
17 Aug 24 i    ii      i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too3Mike Terry
17 Aug 24 i    ii      `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes and thus Fred too27Mike Terry
16 Aug 24 i    i`* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- Mike correcting Joes10Richard Damon
15 Aug 24 i    `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point2Mike Terry
14 Aug 24 +* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point17Mikko
14 Aug 24 `* Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point4Fred. Zwarts

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal