XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 7/31/2025 1:44 AM, joes wrote:   
   > Am Thu, 31 Jul 2025 00:55:18 -0500 schrieb olcott:   
   >> On 7/31/2025 12:46 AM, joes wrote:   
   >>> Am Thu, 31 Jul 2025 00:40:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:   
   >>>> On 7/31/2025 12:36 AM, joes wrote:   
   >>>>> Am Wed, 30 Jul 2025 20:00:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:   
   >>>>>> On 7/30/2025 7:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 7/30/25 7:46 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>> executed HHH simulates DDD that calls HHH(DDD)   
   >>>>>>>> that simulates DDD that calls HHH(DDD)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Nope, the first HHH simulated will abort the simulation before we   
   >>>>>>> get here.   
   >>>>>> Not at all. My encoded HHH aborts as soon as it sees the pattern   
   >>>>>> repeat once.   
   >>>>> Yes, exactly. I snipped it above to that.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> It could have been encoded to wait until it sees this same pattern   
   >>>>>> repeat ten times.   
   >>>>> Yes, it could. In which case it would only see 3 repetitions before   
   >>>>> the simulated HHH aborts (incorrectly, because it still only waits   
   >>>>> for 2 repetitions).   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> They all use the exact same machine code otherwise that is cheating.   
   >>> No, you can't change the input depending on the simulator.   
   >>>   
   >> How can the exact same unchanged sequence of machine code bytes be   
   >> different than it is?   
   > Excellent question! DDD is not a template that calls its own simulator   
   > or whatever HHH refers to. It is a concrete program that calls your   
   > particular implementation which aborts after the second repetition.   
   > If you then try to modify *the simulator* (not the name "HHH") you   
   > must keep DDD fixed, including its version of HHH. Otherwise you are   
   > not simulating the same program.   
   >   
      
   HH emulates DDD in a separate process context. When   
   this DDD calls HHH(DDD) the original HHH emulates this   
   HHH in the DDD process context.   
      
   This emulated HHH creates yet another process context   
   to emulate its own DDD. When this DDD calls yet another   
   HHH(DDD) this provides enough execution trace that the   
   repeating pattern can be seen.   
      
   *The above is proven right here*   
   https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius   
   hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)