Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 20:40:32 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <v645v1$29pag$3@dont-email.me>
References: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 20:40:33 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6cedb142f34e03a5852de86ea322d5ac";
	logging-data="2418000"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+glGQ/l4KQ2689xcS6WxFQ"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5+xJEpnGEkDI3v52hubWyyXg2ek=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2375

Op 03.jul.2024 om 20:20 schreef olcott:
> _DDD()
> [00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
> [00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
> [00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
> [0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
> [0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
> [00002182] 5d               pop ebp
> [00002183] c3               ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
> 
> DDD correctly emulated by any element of the infinite
> set of every pure function HHH cannot possibly reach
> its own ret instruction and halt. That HHH aborts its
> emulation at some point or never aborts its emulation
> cannot possibly change this.
> 

Ad hominem attacks always try to hide a lack of argumentation.

It has been proved that HHH cannot possibly correctly simulate itself.
So, the above code shows that the incorrect simulation of DDD by HHH is 
unable to reach the 'ret' instruction, because it either never aborts, 
or aborts one cycle too soon, when the simulated HHH is only one cycle 
from its own abort and return and then the return of DDD would follow.

Olcott could not find an error in this reasoning, but just repeats his 
baseless claims. So, who is hiding the truth?