Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid
 rebuttals ---PSR---
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 09:55:31 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <8406e9a80f76066996ddc045c80c1feddbacff7c@i2pn2.org>
References: <vq5qqc$1j128$2@dont-email.me>
	<2002d599ebdfb7cd5a023881ab2faca9801b219d@i2pn2.org>
	<vq8l3d$29b9l$1@dont-email.me>
	<4426787ad065bfd0939e10b937f3b8b2798d0578@i2pn2.org>
	<vq8mam$29b9l$5@dont-email.me>
	<920b573567d204a5c792425b09097d79ee098fa5@i2pn2.org>
	<vq9lvn$2ei4j$3@dont-email.me>
	<4453bc0c1141c540852ea2223a7fedefc93f564c@i2pn2.org>
	<vqadoh$2ivg7$2@dont-email.me> <vqae74$2ivcn$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqag6q$2jief$1@dont-email.me> <vqagb7$2ivcn$3@dont-email.me>
	<vqakhi$2jief$3@dont-email.me> <vqalvr$2ivcn$5@dont-email.me>
	<vqaq2s$2lgq7$2@dont-email.me> <vqasm4$2lue4$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqb43k$2mueq$1@dont-email.me> <vqb4ub$2lue4$3@dont-email.me>
	<vqb683$2mueq$2@dont-email.me> <vqbp05$2td95$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqcvlu$34c3r$3@dont-email.me> <vqecht$3epcf$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqf2lh$3j68u$5@dont-email.me> <vqf6mm$3j47v$4@dont-email.me>
	<vqg7ng$3qol2$3@dont-email.me> <vqh07g$26ac$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqhio1$5r7r$1@dont-email.me> <vqhoo7$64cl$2@dont-email.me>
	<vqi020$8e1u$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 09:55:31 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3558681"; 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

Am Sat, 08 Mar 2025 11:50:56 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 3/8/2025 9:46 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 08.mrt.2025 om 15:03 schreef olcott:
>>> On 3/8/2025 2:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 08.mrt.2025 om 02:49 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 3/7/2025 10:25 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 07.mrt.2025 om 16:17 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 3/7/2025 2:59 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 06.mrt.2025 om 21:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/6/2025 3:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 06.mrt.2025 om 04:53 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 9:31 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 10:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 7:10 PM, dbush wrote:

>>> Apparently you don't understand that inputs to a simulating
>>> termination analyzer specifying infinite recursion or recursive
>>> emulation cannot possibly reach their own final state and terminate
>>> normally.
>> If we agree, what is the problem?
>> We agree that HHH correctly reports that it cannot possibly bring the
>> simulation of itself to a correct end.

Yeah, so?

>>>> Why would we want to use such an analyser that reports that it fails
>>>> to complete the simulation?
>>> Perhaps you incorrectly expect infinite loops to end?
>> Wrong. I understand perfectly that HHH cannot possible reach the end of
>> the simulation of itself and it correctly reports that it could not
>> complete the simulation.
> DD specifies non-termination.
Now that is just wrong.

-- 
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.