Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Liar detector: Peter OLCOTT YES!
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 19:18:51 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <5e6e8072022c865ced4b1a1de23b786bc05c22ce@i2pn2.org>
References: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 23:18:51 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2057085"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v644pn$29t4h$3@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4352
Lines: 69

On 7/3/24 2:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> _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 correctly emulated by any element of the infinite
> set of every pure function HHH cannot possibly reach
> its own ret instruction and halt. That HHH aborts its
> emulation at some point or never aborts its emulation
> cannot possibly change this.
> 

No, you are just showing your ignorance.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to "Correctly Emulate" this input per the semantics of 
the x86 instruction set as given, as it referncee undefined memory.

So, your claim is just a lie.

Now, if we included ALL of memory as the input, as you seem to want to 
do, but illogically also want to exclude so you can change it (to foist 
your deception), the it is possible to correctly emulate this input, but 
each different version of HHH must be considered to be a DIFFERENT 
input, as that memory contents we needed to add was different for each 
of them.

Now, since "Behavior of the input" needs to be defined as something that 
is ONLY a function of that input, and NOT what machine is looking at it, 
and the standard definiton of that behavior is what the program the 
input represents does when run, or what a complete emulation of that 
input would do.

So, while it seems that no HHH can emulate the input based on itself to 
the return point, the "Behavior" of that input, WILL reach that point 
for EVERY HHH that chooses the abort and return option, and every other 
one that doesn't just fails to be the decider you want it to be.

Thus, your "claimed" criteria, which can not be a "property of the 
input" might be a correct answer for the improper subjective question, 
but not for any "valid" criteria, especially since you have made it 
clear that this is part of your path to disproveing the halting theorem.

Also, just to point out, your HHH MUST emulate the instructions of HHH 
in responce to see the call instruction and NOT just "go down a level of 
indirection" becuase you have defined you emulation to be based on the 
x86 language, which doesn't support that behaivor, and even in more 
generalized emulations, that is only valid if HHH was an UNCONDITIONAL 
emulator (and not a correctly emulate until... type of emulator) which 
is can not be unless you agree that it isn't a decider.

So, we are back to your issue that you have been unable to actual 
produce a trace of the emulation done by HHH, so you can't even prove 
that it does its partial emulation correctly or show what its criteria 
of aborting based on such an emulation is.

Also, since you argument seems to be only basee on making 
unsubstantiated claims (you have yet to show any source from the 
refernce field that shows your idea of a correct emulation of HHH 
switching levels as all your published traces do is valid), and you just 
use ad hominem attack, shows that you also don't understand how logic 
actually works.


So, YOU are show to be the one using deceit and lies.