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(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating
 itself emulating DDD
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:00:50 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <0b90e1452d5000fb94d20e2889715c1b00a71297@i2pn2.org>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me> <vhsri7$1ojus$1@dont-email.me>
 <5945fb90e23e2b78a90da47de02bd8e6d8c3ec4d@i2pn2.org>
 <vht1c8$1pgbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <8c25d20279cfad6662137025897575068e10fe39@i2pn2.org>
 <vhvdac$28qs1$2@dont-email.me>
 <7ccf1daed71803939ed9acc5dc0f436e46bbfba2@i2pn2.org>
 <vi3hj5$3ad5d$1@dont-email.me>
 <d69b59d8743dd2713e16ca41604ff30b4741b82d@i2pn2.org>
 <GcudnQRbD7HyPNv6nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <vi72fe$dbk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi76pj$106j$2@dont-email.me>
 <db87472521a4e553e992c6933a235dec24fb002f@i2pn2.org>
 <vi8g7t$85ij$1@dont-email.me>
 <ee397fde844b6e8f2266885eb1b657ad4da768f8@i2pn2.org>
 <via50f$ju6v$1@dont-email.me>
 <349430b1223591beb2ebea42b5f3a9e64ea8d795@i2pn2.org>
 <via6qe$ju6v$5@dont-email.me>
 <f4f759fcc2f0b701a91e38062c25d16534e470af@i2pn2.org>
 <via804$kfnn$1@dont-email.me>
 <39d1fae0d0e03ceb82a6a7c722581d5e84d4998f@i2pn2.org>
 <via9kk$kpf2$1@dont-email.me>
 <6f73ca664f7017ea34651a485a4bd3602e9cbe57@i2pn2.org>
 <vilrih$3n2q7$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:00:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1014377"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vilrih$3n2q7$2@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 6535
Lines: 95

On 12/2/24 9:48 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/28/2024 1:48 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:35:16 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 11/28/2024 11:32 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:07:16 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 11/28/2024 10:51 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Thu, 28 Nov 2024 10:47:10 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 11/28/2024 10:27 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Thu, 28 Nov 2024 10:16:15 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/28/2024 4:04 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am Wed, 27 Nov 2024 19:15:41 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/27/2024 8:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/27/24 8:28 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/27/2024 6:14 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2024 7:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/25/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/24/2024 11:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/24/24 9:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 11:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 9:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-22 16:45:52 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2024 2:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-21 15:32:38 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/21/2024 3:12 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-20 22:03:43 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2024 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-20 03:23:12 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/19/2024 4:12 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-18 20:42:02 +0000, olcott
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/18/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When DDD is emulated by HHH and DDD calls HHH(DDD) this call
>>>>>>>>>>> never returns.
>>>>>>>>>> That's weird. Why can't HHH simulate itself?
>>>>>>>>> I have already told you and conclusively proven that HHH does
>>>>>>>>> emulate itself emulating DDD. I have told you this dozens of times
>>>>>>>>> and my code continues to prove this.
>>>>>>>> I don't get it. HHH clearly halts in order to return a value. But
>>>>>>>> that value is "doesn't halt". Why does HHH, which does only a
>>>>>>>> partial simulation, report that itself (called by DDD) doesn't
>>>>>>>> halt?
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm You just may not have the
>>>>>>> required software engineering skill to get it. If you did then you
>>>>>>> could just carefully study the code and see.
>>>>>> That's what I mean. I can see the code, but the code is wrong.
>>>>> The code does do what it does do.
>>>> Yes, the wrong thing.
>>>>
>>>>>> If HHH halts at all, it needs to return that HHH halts.
>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly halt.
>>>>> You can fail to understand that, you can lie about that, it remains
>>>>> immutably a verified fact none-the-less.
> 
>>>> Yes, HHH can't simulate itself.
> 
>>> The code proves that HHH does emulate itself emulating DDD why lie?
> 
>> The code proves that HHH aborts.
>>
> 
> You said:
>  >>> HHH can't simulate itself.
> 
> That is WRONG !!!
> HHH DOES EMULATE ITSELF PROVING THAT IT CAN EMULATE ITSELF.
> 



Nope, becuase if HHH looks at the machine code of HHH, which wasn't part 
of its input, it isn.t a pure function, BY DEFINITION.

It is using "global memory" outside its input to affect its behavior.

You are just proving you don't undetstand what you are talking about.

You clearly don't know what a "pure function" is.


Remember, you have made it clear that the code of HHH is *NOT* part of 
the input, and thus any accessing of it is the use of a global that 
wasn't part of the inputs to the funciton.

And HHH's emulation of itself isn't correct, as it has been shown that 
HHH(DDD) returns 0, but HHH makes the ungrouded assumption that HHH(DDD) 
will not return by imagining that the HHH that it is given is something 
different than itself.