Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Every D(D) simulated by H presents non-halting behavior to H +++
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 23:13:46 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 137
Message-ID: <v1c9pq$325ls$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v18f9e$5asq$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v18nbf$21c98$1@dont-email.me> <v1c0p8$2skfl$3@dont-email.me>
 <v1c5fk$31a3g$1@dont-email.me> <v1c5te$9f73$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v1c7jr$31thl$1@dont-email.me> <v1c8nh$9f72$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v1c8un$3242s$2@dont-email.me> <v1c9ht$9f73$6@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 06:13:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1fe47412d5222aa086f42d5af46fe483";
	logging-data="3217084"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX183STWrTfCeq/lsXPpHBZwL"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JQvE9GprjbP6hg7HXOWeJ9JVK74=
In-Reply-To: <v1c9ht$9f73$6@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6250

On 5/6/2024 11:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/6/24 11:59 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/6/2024 10:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/6/24 11:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/6/2024 10:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/6/24 11:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/6/2024 8:39 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/05/24 21:40, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> If you are claiming that you have some top secret proof that shows
>>>>>>>> the above execution trace is incorrect I am taking this as the 
>>>>>>>> empty
>>>>>>>> claims of evidence of election fraud that no one has ever seen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The simulated execution trace is proven incorrect because it is 
>>>>>>> different from the actual execution trace.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is not top secret - it is very obvious.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>> 08
>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every H/D pair in the universe where D(D) is simulated by the
>>>>>> same H(D,D) that D(D) calls: AS IN THE ABOVE TEMPLATE
>>>>>> Involves 1 to ∞ steps of D and also includes zero to ∞
>>>>>> recursive simulations where H simulates itself simulating D(D).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None of these simulated inputs can possibly reach past their
>>>>>> own line 03, thus none of them teach their own line 06 and halt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once you accept the software engineering of this we can get
>>>>>> into the much more difficult computer science of this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you cannot understand the software engineering of this
>>>>>> then there is no sense moving on to something more difficult.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Except I have described how to design a set of machines H that can 
>>>>> simulate this input to the finis input to the final line 06.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, your claim is FALSE.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When you interpret
>>>> On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>  > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> *Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
>>>> *stop running unless aborted by H*
>>>>
>>>> as *D NEVER simulated by H*
>>>>
>>>> you have shown a reckless disregard for the truth
>>>> that would win a defamation case.
>>>
>>>
>>> Except that I have explained that this arguement isn't the one I was 
>>> refering to, 
>>
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>> *It is the argument that proves your reckless disregard for the truth*
>>
>> *I am going to make this my canned reply*
>> (Until you change your tune).
>>
>> When you interpret
>> On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>  > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>> *Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
>> *stop running unless aborted by H*
>>
>> as *D NEVER simulated by H*
>>
>> you have shown a reckless disregard for the truth
>> that would win a defamation case.
>>
> 
> 
> And I can make this MY canned reply that shows that yours is just a lie.
> And I am not on a short clock, so can out wait you.
> 

*It <is> the argument that proves you don't tell the truth*
*It <is> the argument that proves you don't tell the truth*
*It <is> the argument that proves you don't tell the truth*
*It <is> the argument that proves you don't tell the truth*

Message-ID: <v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>
When you interpret
On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
*Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
*stop running unless aborted by H*

as *D NEVER simulated by H*

you have shown a reckless disregard for the truth
that would win a defamation case.

> 
> Except that I have explained that this argument isn't the one I was 
> refering to, and you are just proving yourself to be a pathological liar 
> by saying it is.
> 
> You just don't understand what Truth means.
> 
> Since you refuse to stop lying, I will refuse to stop calling you are lair.
> 
> Of course, (unless you are lying about your health) you may soon be 
> forced to stop posting because you have become unable to do so, and then 
> I can stop refuting you.
> 
> 
> The fact that you will not take me up on the STFU challange, I guess 
> that proves that you don't really believe your own lies, and are just 
> admitting that you ARE just a pathological liar.
> 
> 

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer