Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met

Op 14.mei.2025 om 17:48 schreef olcott:

On 5/14/2025 6:19 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 14.mei.2025 om 05:42 schreef olcott:

On 5/12/2025 1:17 PM, olcott wrote:

Introduction to the Theory of Computation 3rd Edition
by Michael Sipser (Author)
4.4 out of 5 stars    568 rating
>
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael- Sipser/ dp/113318779X
>
int DD()
  {
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
  }
>
DD correctly simulated by any pure simulator
named HHH cannot possibly terminate thus proving
that this criteria has been met:
>
<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>
>

>
People tried for more than a year to get away with saying
that DDD was not emulated by HHH correctly until I stipulated
that DDD is emulated by HHH according to the rules of the
x86 language. Then they shut up about this.

>
Olcott tried to get away by claiming that his simulator follows the rules of the x86 language, but he ignores the proofs that the x86 language was violated with a premature abort.

 *THE SPEC REQUIRES THIS PREMATURE ABORT*

Please cite the page of the specs of the x86 language where you read this. You can't.
Please face the facts, not your dreams. Come out of rebuttal mode. Try to think!