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: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 07:53:49 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <53eac2098cf5d23bb5e5b94e56e8075dfa96b6ab@i2pn2.org>
References: <v6un9t$3nufp$1@dont-email.me> <v7013v$2ccv$1@dont-email.me>
 <v70nt7$61d8$6@dont-email.me>
 <58fc6559638120b31e128fe97b5e955248afe218@i2pn2.org>
 <v71mjh$bp3i$1@dont-email.me>
 <1173a460ee95e0ca82c08abecdefc80ba86646ac@i2pn2.org>
 <v71okl$bvm2$1@dont-email.me>
 <5f6daf68f1b4ffac854d239282bc811b5b806659@i2pn2.org>
 <v71ttb$crk4$1@dont-email.me>
 <60e7a93cb8cec0afb68b3e40a0e82e9d63fa8e2a@i2pn2.org>
 <v721po$h4kr$1@dont-email.me> <v73td3$qkp2$6@dont-email.me>
 <v73tvs$qpi9$1@dont-email.me> <v757fl$15lqv$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 11:53:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3477624"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <v757fl$15lqv$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4629
Lines: 64

On 7/16/24 3:28 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 15.jul.2024 om 21:40 schreef olcott:
>> On 7/15/2024 2:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 15.jul.2024 om 04:33 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 7/14/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/14/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination
>>>>>> of simulating termination analyzer HHH necessarily specifies
>>>>>> non-halting behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Excpet, as I have shown, it doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your problem is you keep on ILEGALLY changing the input in your 
>>>>> argument because you have misdefined what the input is.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _DDD()
>>>> [00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>> [00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>> [00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
>>>> [0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>> [00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>> [00002173] 5d         pop ebp
>>>> [00002174] c3         ret
>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
>>>>
>>>> The input *is* the machine address of this finite
>>>> string of bytes: 558bec6863210000e853f4ffff83c4045dc3
>>>>
>>>
>>> It seems that you do not understand x86 language. The input is not a 
>>> string of bytes, but an address (00002163). This points to the 
>>> starting of the code of DDD. But a simulation needs a program, not a 
>>> function calling undefined other functions. Therefore, all functions 
>>> called by DDD (such as HHH) are included in the code to simulate.
>>
>> *The input is the machine address of this finite*
>> *string of bytes: 558bec6863210000e853f4ffff83c4045dc3*
> 
> It seems that olcott does not understand the x86 language.
> The input for HHH is an address, not a finite string. Nowhere does this 
> address specify that it is meant to be interpreted as a finite string.
> There is no length specification, it is only the address of DDD in the 
> middle of an address space. So, HHH has access to the whole address space.
> The parameter, therefore, must be interpreted only as a starting point 
> of the program and does nowhere exclude other addresses in this address 
> space. In particular, the functions called by DDD are included in the 
> address space given to HHH. Including address 000015c3.
> Unbelievable that someone who blames other people for not knowing x86 
> makes such an error when reading x86.
> 

He says that it is just that string because he thinks he gets to make 
the rules. All that does is make him a LIAR.

Either the input is the whole program DDD, and the claim that string is 
the whole input is a lie, or the input is just that string, and the 
claim that it represents the whole program is a lie.

Either way, he is just demonstrating that his idea of logic is to see 
who can tell the biggest lie and convince someone, only he has lost 
because everyone sees through his lies, and he has said them so many 
times everyone knows that everything he says just needs to be treated as 
a lie, even if they might happen to be true, that is just a mistake,