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 --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:55:23 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <23fd3f72b728e3e73e117760f72d81797fd2d362@i2pn2.org>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me> <vhf257$16a9p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhg8qq$1duv3$1@dont-email.me> <vhho9r$1pkdu$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhjkn0$28t3s$2@dont-email.me> <vhkbia$1md6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhlmbv$9l59$2@dont-email.me>
 <d575206d11b6ca9827a7245566e3d2a990cc0de2@i2pn2.org>
 <vhm7j5$c0mm$2@dont-email.me>
 <30f8781365f13eb6712a653321d2e49aa833f360@i2pn2.org>
 <vhnj19$mjea$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 02:55:23 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3574237"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vhnj19$mjea$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5824
Lines: 108

On 11/21/24 10:19 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/20/2024 10:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/20/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/20/2024 5:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 11/20/24 5:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>>>> The "the mapping" on the subject line is not correct. The 
>>>>>>>>>> subject line
>>>>>>>>>> does not specify which mapping and there is no larger context 
>>>>>>>>>> that could
>>>>>>>>>> specify that. Therefore it should be "a mapping".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>>>    return;
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _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 emulated by any encoding of HHH that emulates N
>>>>>>>>>>> to infinity number of steps of DDD cannot possibly
>>>>>>>>>>> reach its "return" instruction final halt state.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instructions before tha return.
>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instruction after the HHH call.
>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach return instruction of HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This applies to every DDD emulated by any HHH no
>>>>>>>>>>> matter the recursive depth of emulation. Thus it is
>>>>>>>>>>> a verified fact that the input to HHH never halts.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That is too vague to be regareded true or false. It is 
>>>>>>>>>> perfectly possibe
>>>>>>>>>> to define two programs and call them DDD and HHH
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What a jackass. DDD and HHH have been fully specified
>>>>>>>>> for many months.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They are specified in a way that makes your "every DDD" and "any 
>>>>>>>> DDD"
>>>>>>>> bad (perhaps even incorrect) use of Common language.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I specify the infinite sets with each element numbered
>>>>>>> on the top of page 2 of my paper. Back in April of 2023
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have also specifed that HHH is the program in your GitHub 
>>>>>> repository.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Should I assume that you must be lying about
>>>>> this because you did not quote where I did this?
>>>>
>>>> You forget how many times you have posted the link to your "fully 
>>>> functioning code"?
>>>>
>>>> You can't have it both ways, either that *IS* the code of HHH.
>>>>
>>>
>>> My code is one example of the infinite set of every possible
>>> HHH that emulates DDD according to the semantics of the x86
>>> language.
>>
>> But it gets the wrong answer for the halting problem, as DDD dpes halt.
>>
> 
> DDD emulated by HHH does not halt. You lie about this
> and condemn yourself to actual Hell. Are you a fake Christian?
> 

DDD emulated by HHH does not have a property that is like "halting".

Halting is a semantic property of the "input".

You have made it clear that your "Input" is the code of the non-leaf 
function DDD, whose behavior is NOT just a function of itself, but of 
other things, and without those other things specified, you have no 
semantic property to even talk about,.

Your question is like the height of the color green.

I do not lie, but then you have shown that you don't actually understand 
the meaning of what Truth actually is. You might be able to quote words 
that define it, but you don't actually know what those means, as you are 
unable to actually apply them.

Sorry, but YOU are the one that has punched yourself a one-way ticket to 
Gehanna, and unless you repent soon, you may find your eternity is spent 
working out the behavior of your infinite set of inputs.