Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never
 reaches its halt state ---
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:48:37 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <03cabc6945effa1696e8ebfa691e6e661b896634@i2pn2.org>
References: <v8jh7m$30k55$1@dont-email.me> <v8kp6s$3c5h2$2@dont-email.me>
 <v8ld1f$3f6vr$5@dont-email.me> <v8ldl0$3ennf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8lfb9$3g2jl$1@dont-email.me> <v8lgsr$3gadt$2@dont-email.me>
 <v8lhrr$3gkbk$1@dont-email.me> <v8n6un$3tv08$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8nums$1n09$6@dont-email.me> <v8vah7$29sva$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8vr7e$32fso$2@dont-email.me> <v91vc4$3qp1r$2@dont-email.me>
 <v92ge1$p1$2@dont-email.me>
 <f37108f5c9868fc309f42ef78982e2c865ad544c@i2pn2.org>
 <v940uh$hqmp$1@dont-email.me> <v94dir$jt3i$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9569q$o1gt$2@dont-email.me> <v95ch2$p7ls$1@dont-email.me>
 <v95fhp$q2jp$1@dont-email.me> <v95r1q$7ps5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v95vjo$60of$1@dont-email.me> <v97895$gh2a$2@dont-email.me>
 <v97j7u$ilah$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:48:37 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2084912"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v97j7u$ilah$3@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3364
Lines: 43

On 8/10/24 7:34 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/10/2024 3:27 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.aug.2024 om 22:53 schreef olcott:
>>> On 8/9/2024 2:35 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.aug.2024 om 18:19 schreef olcott:
>>>
>>> void DDD()
>>> {
>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>    return;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Each HHH of every HHH that can possibly exist definitely
>>> emulates zero to infinity instructions of DDD correctly.
>>> Every expert in the C language sees that this emulated DDD
>>> cannot possibly reaches its own "return" instruction halt state.
>> And you don't need to be an expert to see that this proves that all 
>> these simulations are incorrect. 
> 
> In other words you are trying to get away with the lie that
> Richard has been persistently pushing:
> 
> When N > 0 instructions of DDD are correctly emulated by HHH
> then no instructions of DDD have been correctly emulated.
> 

No, that is just a lie you say about me.

I never said that NO instructions of DDD have been correctly emulated, 
just tnat not all of the instructions of DDD have been correctly emulated.

The fact that you keep repeating the obviousl LIE, just shows that you 
have nothing to base you claims on.

That or you just don't understand the basic meaning of the words correct 
and incorrect.

For something to be correct, it must be TOTALLY correct, and incorrect 
doesn't mean nothing is right, just that it isn't ALL right.

You logic seems to think that if any part is correct, then it must be 
correct, and the only way something is incorrect is if nothing in it is 
correct, which is just the basis of so many lies, as that isn't what the 
words mean.