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: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:51:05 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <d575206d11b6ca9827a7245566e3d2a990cc0de2@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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 23:51:05 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3419295"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vhlmbv$9l59$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4073
Lines: 78

On 11/20/24 5:03 PM, olcott wrote:
> 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?

You forget how many times you have posted the link to your "fully 
functioning code"?

You can't have it both ways, either that *IS* the code of HHH.

> 
> I honestly do not believe that I would have ever made
> the stupid mistake of calling a C function a computer
> program.
> 

Which just shows how stupid you are.