Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!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, 28 Nov 2024 07:50:11 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <823171f50b9026448aaeeb432f823b08d28ba457@i2pn2.org>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$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>
 <vhs21l$1kglp$1@dont-email.me> <vhsncn$1nu6d$1@dont-email.me>
 <17dd1e646a0cd01f94d9505a9be90fd3925add12@i2pn2.org>
 <vhsri7$1ojus$1@dont-email.me>
 <5945fb90e23e2b78a90da47de02bd8e6d8c3ec4d@i2pn2.org>
 <vht1c8$1pgbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <8c25d20279cfad6662137025897575068e10fe39@i2pn2.org>
 <vhvdac$28qs1$2@dont-email.me>
 <7ccf1daed71803939ed9acc5dc0f436e46bbfba2@i2pn2.org>
 <vi3hj5$3ad5d$1@dont-email.me>
 <d69b59d8743dd2713e16ca41604ff30b4741b82d@i2pn2.org>
 <GcudnQRbD7HyPNv6nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <vi72fe$dbk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi76pj$106j$2@dont-email.me>
 <db87472521a4e553e992c6933a235dec24fb002f@i2pn2.org>
 <vi8g7t$85ij$1@dont-email.me>
 <e50997c1bbf6f693cef6cdc491d37d45f1514021@i2pn2.org>
 <vi9fu5$g8di$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 12:50:11 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="311556"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <vi9fu5$g8di$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 17021
Lines: 335

On 11/28/24 5:16 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/27/2024 9:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/27/24 8:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/27/2024 8:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 11/27/24 8:28 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 11/27/2024 6:14 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/26/2024 7:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/25/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/24/2024 11:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/24/24 9:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 11:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 9:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-22 16:45:52 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean you lied when you said "one concrete example"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One element of an infinite set does not say there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no infinite set. Is says there is an infinite set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But one element of an infinite set is not the infinite set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are just showing that your logic is based on proven
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorrect set theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IF HHH is an ELEMENT of the set, then it is that one 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> element
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========