Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 07. Jun 2024, 16:40:37
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v3v9ll$242e9$7@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 6/7/2024 10:32 AM, joes wrote:
Am Fri, 07 Jun 2024 10:20:09 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 6/7/2024 10:09 AM, Python wrote:
Le 07/06/2024 à 17:05, olcott a écrit :
On 6/7/2024 9:55 AM, Python wrote:
Le 07/06/2024 à 16:47, olcott a écrit :
Anyway, you're wrong : a Turing machine can take its own description as
part of its input, as it is finite.
That is what I said. They cannot however take actual Turing machines as
inputs it must always be a finite string machine description.
Of course. That is not a restriction.
 
The issue here is that I proved that DD correctly simulated by HH
has different behavior than the directly executed DD(DD) and
everyone's "rebuttal" to this proof is to simply ignore it.
When you actually try to form a rebuttal of the above you will see
that I am correct. So far everyone simply ignores the proof that I am
correct as their only rebuttal.
A {correct simulation} means that each instruction of the above x86
machine language of DD is correctly simulated by HH and simulated in the
correct order.
And to the end. Thus it can't behave differently than direct execution.
 
void Infinite_Recursion(u32 N)
{
   Infinite_Recursion(N);
}
You must not be very good at programming if you believe
that Infinite_Recursion must be simulated "to the end"

Anyone claiming that HH should report on the behavior of the directly
executed DD(DD) is requiring a violation of the above definition of
correct simulation.
But those are the same. How does simulating something change it?
 
It seems to boil down to you just don't know enough about
programming otherwise it would occur to you that there
cannot possibly exist any correct rebuttal to the following:
Try to show how this DD correctly simulated by any HH ever
stops running without having its simulation aborted by HH.
_DD()
[00001e12] 55         push ebp
[00001e13] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp
[00001e15] 51         push ecx
[00001e16] 8b4508     mov  eax,[ebp+08]
[00001e19] 50         push eax      ; push DD
[00001e1a] 8b4d08     mov  ecx,[ebp+08]
[00001e1d] 51         push ecx      ; push DD
[00001e1e] e85ff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH
A {correct simulation} means that each instruction of the
above x86 machine language of DD is correctly simulated
by HH and simulated in the correct order.
Anyone claiming that HH should report on the behavior
of the directly executed DD(DD) is requiring a violation
of the above definition of correct simulation.
--
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
3 Jun 24 * Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?332immibis
3 Jun 24 +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?309Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review29olcott
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 ii`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review26Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 ii `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review25olcott
4 Jun 24 ii  +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review23Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review22olcott
4 Jun 24 ii    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review21Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review20olcott
4 Jun 24 ii      +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review13Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review12olcott
5 Jun 24 ii      i +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 ii      i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review10Mikko
5 Jun 24 ii      i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review9olcott
5 Jun 24 ii      i   +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2wij
5 Jun 24 ii      i   i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1olcott
6 Jun 24 ii      i   +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5Mikko
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review4olcott
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Mikko
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
7 Jun 24 ii      i   i   `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 ii      i   `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review6Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii       `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5olcott
4 Jun 24 ii        +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 ii        i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?279Ben Bacarisse
3 Jun 24 i +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review277olcott
3 Jun 24 i i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review73Mikko
3 Jun 24 i ii`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review72olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i ii +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review2joes
4 Jun 24 i ii i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review67Mikko
4 Jun 24 i ii i`* Halting Problem is wrong two different ways66olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
5 Jun 24 i ii i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways41Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways40olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways21John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways20olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i i  `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways15John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways14olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i+- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i`- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid5olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid3Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i   `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i i     `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways17Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i ii i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways16olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i    +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i    `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i     +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i     i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     i `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways23Mikko
5 Jun 24 i ii i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways22olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways18Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways17olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways16Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways15olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways14Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways13olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i     +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i     +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways8joes
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6Mikko
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
9 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i   `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
4 Jun 24 i ii `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review201Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?20Fred. Zwarts
3 Jun 24 `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal