Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Flibble=E2=80=99s_Leap=3A_Why_Behavioral_Divergence?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?_Implies_a_Type_Distinction_in_the_Halting_Problem?=
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 21:51:04 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <0433a11f2e25b708f6097726d7bab1e70f7e708d@i2pn2.org>
References: <vv1UP.77894$JJT6.54808@fx16.ams4> <vvqd4u$g8a1$1@dont-email.me>
 <7N2UP.527443$wBt6.464256@fx15.ams4> <vvqfgq$gmmk$1@dont-email.me>
 <os3UP.670056$BFJ.223954@fx13.ams4> <vvqgpt$gmmk$4@dont-email.me>
 <aG3UP.366972$wBVe.321504@fx06.ams4>
 <39947848bf73be52ee6fbbeb6d0d929009dfec8e@i2pn2.org>
 <fR8UP.92502$o31.50010@fx04.ams4>
 <fb3915123ad5c4703b92df902c37267fce2c4812@i2pn2.org>
 <vvrhk6$nejb$2@dont-email.me> <vvrhtj$nnmf$1@dont-email.me>
 <43f0f4158610d859516ba3e0115a8a2b8bd7630b@i2pn2.org>
 <vvrl9h$o2ab$6@dont-email.me>
 <0f61ca2a124d35f813b117bcf078278ccf719d46@i2pn2.org>
 <vvt58r$14pca$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 02:50:09 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="118633"; 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: <vvt58r$14pca$10@dont-email.me>

On 5/12/25 11:48 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2025 6:51 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/11/25 10:09 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/11/2025 8:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/11/25 9:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/11/2025 8:07 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/05/2025 00:19, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/11/25 5:42 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am happy with my final solution; I glanced over all your
>>>>>>>> responses in this thread and they are all invalid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In other words, you are admtting to being happy to be in error.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He has form for placing a finger in each ear and yelling "I'm 
>>>>>> right I'm right I'm right you're all wrong!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's no talking to 2-year-olds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No one here is using any actual reasoning
>>>>> in their rebuttals of my work. They rely
>>>>> on dogma, misdirection, deflection and the
>>>>> strawman error.
>>>>>
>>>>> The last three methods are dishonest.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, they are responding with rules and definitions from the system 
>>>> in question,
>>>>
>>>
>>> A syntax error reporting by one compiler and considered
>>> irrelevant by another compiler provides zero evidence
>>> that DDD correctly emulated by some HHH halts.
>>
>> I wasn't talking about "Syntax Errors".
>>
>> I was talking about the rules of the field of Computation Theory.
>>
>>>
>>> _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]
>>>
>>> THE ONLY THING THAT SHOWS THIS IS THE IS THE
>>> COMPLETE SEQUENCE OF EMULATED STEPS WHERE DDD HALTS.
>>
>> Which is impossble to do as the above is *NOT* a program, as it fails 
>> to have all the code that it uses.
> 
> It need not be a program knucklehead.
> Termination analyzers often work on C functions.
> 

Nope, only PROGRAMS. Now, SOME C funcitons are programs (in the 
computation sense) because they include all there code.

You are just showing how little you understand what you have read, 
because you just don't know the meaning of the words you used.

Have you ever ACTUALLY SEEN a paper about a termination analyizer that 
analyized a non-leaf function, without the actual definition of the 
functions it calls?

You are just showing why the world will just ignore everything you have 
said, even the few ideas that might of had some truth in them, becuase 
it is just too much to figure it out. Your signal to noise is so 
negative, it isn't worth the effort.