Path: news.eternal-september.org!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: DDD correctly emulated by HHH --- Correct Emulation Defined
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:49:14 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <db8aa67218b2a0990cd1df38aca29dbd3930e145@i2pn2.org>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vrgme1$2tr56$1@dont-email.me>
 <vri5mn$6nv4$1@dont-email.me>
 <8354fe5751e03a767452a3999818d5c6da714a6b@i2pn2.org>
 <vrigh6$f35v$1@dont-email.me> <vrj6d3$14iuu$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrjog0$1ilbe$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 23:49:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1199593"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vrjog0$1ilbe$6@dont-email.me>

On 3/21/25 9:10 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/21/2025 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-03-21 01:48:22 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 3/20/2025 8:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/20/25 6:43 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/20/2025 4:16 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-03-20 02:32:43 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When N steps of DDD are emulated by HHH according
>>>>>>> to the semantics of the x86 language then these
>>>>>>> N steps are emulated correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That does not make much sense to define the correct emulation of 
>>>>>> DDD as
>>>>>> it should mean whatever "correct emulation" means when applied to 
>>>>>> DDD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Althouth promised otherwise on the subject line the meaning of "DDD
>>>>>> correctly emulated by HHH" when N is not specified is not defined.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> N in this context always means any element of the
>>>>> set of natural numbers.
>>>>
>>>> Then HHH isn't a specific program, and you are admitting that you 
>>>> "logic" is just based on FRAUD.
>>>>
>>>
>>> We have been over this same thing too many times.
>>
>> You are right. But you can't figure out how to avoid that.
>>
> 
> I explained that in the part you ignored.
> When I fully answer a question endlessly
> repeating the same question after it has been
> fully answered is not acceptable.
> 

Inb other words, you admit to your lies, but then try to claim that they 
are not lies, just 'alternate truths' which is just another name for a lie.

Your problem is that you have ADMITTED that you "logic" isn't based on 
real logic or the definitions of the systems you are talking about, and 
thus everything you have said is just a FRAUD.