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: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 11:58:00 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <67aa4af4497058de35d3c5e5b36349e6b2644ee5@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$2@dont-email.me> <vhmthl$j0ao$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhnjqm$mjea$2@dont-email.me> <vhpffl$13p8e$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhqcg0$18k1i$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 16:58:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3662445"; 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: <vhqcg0$18k1i$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5602
Lines: 107

On 11/22/24 11:45 AM, olcott wrote:
> 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:
>>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>> No, you may assume that I was confused by your lack of clarity and
>>>> in particular by your bad choice of names.
>>>>
>>>> If you clearly state that HHH is not the function HHH that you have
>>>> in your GitHub repository then I needn't to consider the possiblity
>>>> that you just triying to deceive by equivcation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> HHH is one concrete example of an infinite set of instances
>>> such that DDD is emulated by HHH N times.
>>
>> That sentence says that there is only one HHH, contradicting your
>> earlier statement that HHH is a generic term for every member of some
>> set.
>>
> 
> You seem to be a damned liar: "infinite set of instances"
> 
> 
> 

And one thing can't be an infinite set.

You can't "run" an infinte set of deciders to get *AN* answer.

You are just showing your logic isn't based on "truth", by your own lies 
based on redefining words that have established meaning, perhaps because 
you are too stupid to understand their meaning, but you have move that 
error to outside the bound of "honest mistake" by your repeated 
insistance, taking it to a reckless disregard for the truth.

Sorry, but that is just how it is, and if you are too stupid to 
understand that, that is your problem.