Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #107877
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? |
| Date | 2024-06-26 19:41 -0400 |
| Organization | i2pn2 (i2pn.org) |
| Message-ID | <v5i8vn$17ej1$4@i2pn2.org> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <v5bub0$vagk$1@dont-email.me> <v5e3ou$1ge18$2@dont-email.me> <v5eg5j$1ikpr$3@dont-email.me> <v5ghfv$21s9r$1@dont-email.me> <v5h2vs$24jbd$3@dont-email.me> |
On 6/26/24 8:53 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/26/2024 2:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-25 13:19:46 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 6/25/2024 4:48 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-06-24 14:03:12 +0000, immibis said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24/06/24 15:50, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/24/2024 2:32 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-06-23 13:23:10 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2024 4:42 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> When the head line has the words "these verified facts" the
>>>>>>>>> message should
>>>>>>>>> first tell what facts are "these verified facts" and who
>>>>>>>>> verified them
>>>>>>>>> before any further discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is a verified fact that 2 + 3 = 5 according to the semantics
>>>>>>>> of arithmetic. Anyone having an opinion that contradicts this is
>>>>>>>> WRONG.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure, but that was not the first thing mentioned in the initial
>>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int P(ptr2 x)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The call from P to H(P,P) when P is correctly emulated
>>>>>> by H cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The call from P to H(P,P) when P is correctly emulated
>>>>>> by H1 DOES return.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Verified fact: the emulation is incorrect
>>>>
>>>> But which emulation? By H or by H1?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Both of them are correct.
>>> Because P never calls H1(P,P) and P does call H(P,P)
>>> the call from P to H(P,P) returns in the first case
>>> and cannot possibly return in the second case.
>>
>> Obviously false. The meaning of H(P,P) is determined by the text of H.
>> The meaning is fully determined by the complier that complies to the
>> x86 code and the semantics of x86. If one simulator interpretes the
>> x86 code differently from another simulator then one of them does not
>> follow the x86 semantics and is therefore incorrect.
By that logic, ALL deciders are "Correct" as they answer what they
answer. That seems to be the sort of logic system you want.
What H is SUPPOSED to do, and the meaning of the input to H, is
determined by the SPECIFICATION of H.
>>
>
> _DDD()
> [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
> [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD)
> [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04
> [00002182] 5d pop ebp
> [00002183] c3 ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>
> The call from DDD to
> the x86 emulator H0(DDD) at machine address 0000217a
> when DDD is correctly emulated by H0 cannot possibly return.
And "Correct Emulation" of an input is only really correct if carried to
completion, because that IS the semantics of the x86 instruction set.
Otherwise it is just a PARTIAL emulation.
>
> When DDD is correctly emulated by H0 then H0 must emulate itself
> emulating DDD. This derives recursive emulation.
So, is H0 defined to be an UNCONDITIONAL emulator, or are you going to
claim at some point that it can stop and still meet its requirements.
>
> When DDD is correctly emulated by H1 then H1 NEED NOT emulate itself
> emulating DDD. This DOES NOT derive recursive emulation.
But, if H0 never stops emulating its input, then H1 will never reach the
end either.
So, if H1 can see an end, then H0 MUST have returned. If H0 didn't see
that in its emulation, it must have aborted it too soon.
>
> *You probably lack suffcient technical competence*
>
YOU clearly don't have the needed technical competence.
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 09:31 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 10:42 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 10:16 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 11:29 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 11:12 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 13:08 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-22 16:03 +0000
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 11:18 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 13:13 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 12:29 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 14:43 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 13:49 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 14:55 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 14:03 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 15:19 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 14:35 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 15:43 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 14:49 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 16:08 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 18:59 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 20:19 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 22:37 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 07:28 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 08:36 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 14:22 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-22 20:01 +0000
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 18:57 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 20:07 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 19:09 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-22 20:26 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-22 22:46 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 07:28 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 08:37 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-23 14:22 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-25 09:20 +0000
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-23 12:50 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 08:25 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-24 10:31 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 08:52 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:20 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-25 12:42 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 08:29 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 21:47 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-26 10:41 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 07:25 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-27 10:02 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-27 12:18 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-27 19:57 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-28 11:55 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-28 09:54 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-28 23:49 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-29 10:44 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-25 20:41 +0000
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 16:24 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 21:47 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-26 10:46 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 07:45 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 19:41 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-27 10:06 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-27 14:19 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-26 08:19 +0000
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-23 12:42 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-23 08:23 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-24 10:32 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 08:50 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-06-24 16:03 +0200
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-25 12:48 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 08:19 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-25 21:47 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-26 10:54 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 07:53 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-26 19:41 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-27 10:18 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-27 14:42 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-27 19:57 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-28 12:06 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-28 10:07 -0500
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-29 10:47 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-06-24 19:21 -0400
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-25 12:47 +0300
Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? joes <noreply@example.com> - 2024-06-25 08:54 +0000
csiph-web