Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan --- Ben's agreement

On 7/12/2024 2:49 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-11 14:40:50 +0000, olcott said:

>
It is a hierarchy of prerequisites of knowledge.
Before anyone can understand a simulating termination
analyzer based on an x86 emulator they must understand
(1) x86 emulation
(2) Termination Analysis.

 The order should be:
(1) termination analysis and termination analyzer,
(2) simulating termination analyzer,
(3) x86,
(4) x86 emulation,
(5) simulating termination analyzer based on an x86 emulator.
 

*That order has proven to not work*
People are getting stuck on x86 emulation.
Most everyone seems to feel that they can disagree
with the semantics of the x86 language.
*We have been stuck on this step for three years*
_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]
1,2,3... ∞ steps of DDD are correctly emulated is every
HHH/DDD pair that can possibly exist when HHH is a pure
function x86 emulator.
I talk about every element of the infinite set because people
were trying to get away with a dishonest shell game ruse
https://jorynjenkins.com/hiding-the-pea/
That wastes weeks and weeks talking in circles.
I spoke of one HHH/DDD pair and they always changed the
subject to a different pair. Now I talk about all of the
HHH/DDD pairs all at once.
For each element of this infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs
DDD never halts. For every finite N number of emulated
steps HHH halts.
This means that every HHH of this set that aborts its
emulation of DDD is correct to reject its DDD as non
halting.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer