Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The actual truth is that ... industry standard stipulative
 definitions
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 22:11:55 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <b06c4952248d83881642c7d84207d3d39c56c59f@i2pn2.org>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me> <vebchp$3m87o$1@dont-email.me>
 <1071eb58637e27c9b2b99052ddb14701a147d23a@i2pn2.org>
 <vebeu2$3mp5v$1@dont-email.me>
 <58fef4e221da8d8bc3c274b9ee4d6b7b5dd82990@i2pn2.org>
 <vebmta$3nqde$1@dont-email.me>
 <99541b6e95dc30204bf49057f8f4c4496fbcc3db@i2pn2.org>
 <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me> <vedibm$4891$2@dont-email.me>
 <72315c1456c399b2121b3fffe90b933be73e39b6@i2pn2.org>
 <vee6s1$7l0f$1@dont-email.me>
 <1180775691cf24be4a082676bc531877147202e3@i2pn2.org>
 <veec23$8jnq$1@dont-email.me>
 <c81fcbf97a35bd428495b0e70f3b54e545e8ae59@i2pn2.org>
 <vef37r$bknp$2@dont-email.me>
 <7e79306e9771378b032e6832548eeef7429888c4@i2pn2.org>
 <veikaf$14fb3$1@dont-email.me> <veipmb$15764$2@dont-email.me>
 <c56fcfcf793d65bebd7d17db4fccafd1b8dea072@i2pn2.org>
 <vejfg0$1879f$3@dont-email.me>
 <bde5947ebdcfb62ecd6e8968052cb3a25c4b1fec@i2pn2.org>
 <vekfi5$1d7rn$1@dont-email.me>
 <6d73c2d966d1d04dcef8f7f9e0c849e17bd73352@i2pn2.org>
 <velnqn$1n3gb$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 02:11:55 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2226561"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <velnqn$1n3gb$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3684
Lines: 41

On 10/15/24 8:39 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/15/2024 4:58 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 20:12:37 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 10/14/24 12:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/14/24 5:53 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-13 12:49:01 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/12/24 8:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>
>>>>> Trying to change to a different analytical framework than the one that
>>>>> I am stipulating is the strawman deception. *Essentially an
>>>>> intentional fallacy of equivocation error*
>>>> But, you claim to be working on that Halting Problem,
>>> I quit claiming this many messages ago and you didn't bother to notice.
>> Can you please give the date and time? Did you also explicitly disclaim
>> it or just silently leave it out?
>>
> 
> Even people of low intelligence that are not trying to
> be as disagreeable as possible would be able to notice
> that a specified C function is not a Turing machine.

But it needs to be computationally equivalent to one to ask about 
Termination.

You just don't seem to understand that implication. Termination is about 
"Computations" (more informally called Programs), and all computations 
are the equivalent of a Turing Machine.

> 
>>> When HHH is an x86 emulation based termination analyzer then each DDD
>>> emulated by any HHH that it calls never returns.
>> Because emulators (correctly) don't abort, so the emulated emulator isn't
>> terminating.
>>
>>> Each of the directly executed HHH emulator/analyzers that returns 0
>>> correctly reports the above non-terminating behavior of its input.
> 
>