Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2025 07:41:23 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <63d7346f0ac9446f440764804d747c32a10494e3@i2pn2.org>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vs50kt$1c1ja$15@dont-email.me>
	<vs5r0j$2f37e$1@dont-email.me> <vs6srk$39556$12@dont-email.me>
	<vs6t10$2p360$6@dont-email.me> <vs70tc$39556$21@dont-email.me>
	<vs71bq$2p360$10@dont-email.me> <vs76m9$3m3q0$1@dont-email.me>
	<vs77th$2p360$11@dont-email.me> <vs78cu$3ms9k$1@dont-email.me>
	<c2b91231b9052e07b6705250938fb9095e711327@i2pn2.org>
	<vs7kvf$3eal$2@dont-email.me>
	<aeb75b411e9f77c974585181c671a47d03b22078@i2pn2.org>
	<vs7qdm$8dae$2@dont-email.me> <vs7r9b$8ajp$1@dont-email.me>
	<vs92l3$1fccq$5@dont-email.me> <vs93ae$1k9u2$1@dont-email.me>
	<vs9g5p$1v2n9$5@dont-email.me> <vs9gcg$20g2j$3@dont-email.me>
	<vs9h9o$23cav$2@dont-email.me> <vs9hh3$20g2j$6@dont-email.me>
	<vs9jie$23cav$4@dont-email.me> <vs9kb1$26cg5$2@dont-email.me>
	<vs9pni$27rl4$9@dont-email.me> <vs9r1b$28tqg$2@dont-email.me>
	<vs9t45$2f6n5$1@dont-email.me>
	<9f2ff3ab9b99a7bb6dfa0885f9757f810ce52e66@i2pn2.org>
	<vsaam4$2sfhq$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2025 07:41:23 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2360712"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3019
Lines: 24

Am Sat, 29 Mar 2025 21:35:48 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 3/29/2025 8:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/29/25 6:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/29/2025 5:08 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 3/29/2025 5:46 PM, olcott wrote:

>>>>> and input D calls UTM1 then the behavior of D simulated by UTM1
>>>> Is not what I asked about.  I asked about the behavior of D when
>>>> executed directly.
>>> Off topic for this thread.
>>> UTM1 D DOES NOT HALT UTM2 D HALTS D is the same finite string in both
>>> cases.
>> No it isn't, not if it is the definition of a PROGRAM.
> The behavior that these machine code bytes specify:
> 558bec6872210000e853f4ffff83c4045dc3 as an input to HHH is different
> than these same bytes as input to HHH1 as a verified fact.
Then HHH is not following the x86 standard.

>> If D doesn't include the machine it calls, then NOTHING can emulate it
>> past the call instruction without violating the definition of a
>> computation/pure program, which you have admitted is a core requirement
>> of your decider (which it turns out it never met).
-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.