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: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach
 its, own line 06
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 19:12:23 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 121
Message-ID: <v2tup8$33eps$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v2nsvh$1rd65$2@dont-email.me> <v2pg3r$27s2r$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2qhlc$2dpfr$5@dont-email.me> <v2qihn$1vblq$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v2qrnf$2fesr$3@dont-email.me> <v2qvar$1vblp$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v2r1dn$2ge4f$4@dont-email.me> <v2r3r0$2h2l7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2r7cq$1vblq$10@i2pn2.org> <v2rpda$2nvot$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2smub$22aq1$1@i2pn2.org> <v2t8o0$2vna0$3@dont-email.me>
 <v2t9tj$22aq1$5@i2pn2.org> <v2tajd$2vna0$6@dont-email.me>
 <v2tdre$22aq1$7@i2pn2.org> <v2tfms$30u1r$3@dont-email.me>
 <v2tgv2$22aq0$2@i2pn2.org> <v2th6a$319s1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tjpr$22aq1$9@i2pn2.org> <v2tk9i$31qgp$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tkit$22aq0$6@i2pn2.org> <v2tl8b$31uo4$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tm5d$22aq0$7@i2pn2.org> <v2tnr1$32e7p$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tp5n$22aq0$9@i2pn2.org> <v2tpdg$32me8$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tptp$22aq1$13@i2pn2.org> <v2tq50$32r0d$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tqh7$22aq1$15@i2pn2.org> <v2tr68$32uto$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2trch$23vgp$1@i2pn2.org> <v2trts$331vq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tsub$23vgp$2@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 02:12:24 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b67ec24a85de95a55e6b4d0cc81926c3";
	logging-data="3259196"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18j7SkEMAEt4C6M9wddKywp"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hX+nJh4KxuKMMrPIgME502DCz2c=
In-Reply-To: <v2tsub$23vgp$2@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6629

On 5/25/2024 6:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/25/24 7:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/25/2024 6:14 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/25/24 7:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/25/2024 5:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/25/24 6:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A BASIS*
>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A BASIS*
>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A BASIS*
>>>>>
>>>>> No we need to handle them to know what you have defined.
>>>>>
>>>>> After all, if we don't agree on the inmplications, we don't have 
>>>>> agreement on what is being stipuated as the defintions.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are not "Baseless" but based on the actual definitions of the 
>>>>> terms that you are changing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is false*
>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is false*
>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is false*
>>>
>>> Didn't say that, which shows you to be a liar, or at least being 
>>> deceptive, which is why we need to handle the implications first
>>>
>>> (Note, you are just proving that you don't understand how logic works)
>>>
>>>
>>> The implications of your specifications are:
>>>
>>> 1) That your H is NOT a computation equivalent for a Turing machine.
>>>
>>
>> OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THE BASIS OF THE SUBJECT LINE OF THIS POST
> 
> Nope, necessary condition to talk, about the subject line.
> 
> After all, if you MEAN by your stipulataion that you actually do intend 
> for H to be a computational equivalent for a Turing Machine, then there 
> are so unstated, but implied requirments on H that will need to be met.
> 
> Like we can make a copy of H and all copies will give the same answer 
> for same input.
> 
> You then need to show that you can actually make such a machine.
> 
>>
>>> 2) That you simulations do NOT say anything about the actual behavior 
>>> of the machine given on the input, especially about its halting status.
>>>
>>
>> OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THE BASIS OF THE SUBJECT LINE OF THIS POST
> 
> Nope, necessary condition to talk, about the subject line.
> 
> After all, if you intend that your definition entails demonstrating the 
> acutual behavior of the input, then your correct simulaition definition 
> includes the additional property that if the instruction wasn't a 
> terminal instruction of the program, that the next instruction MUST be 
> simulated too.
> 
>>
>>> 3) That you "infinite set of H/D pairs" does NOT correspond to the 
>>> concept of the behavior of a machine, and
>>>
>>
>> OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THE BASIS OF THE SUBJECT LINE OF THIS POST
> 
> Nope, necessary condition to talk, about the subject line
> 
>>
>>> 4) That you D and H are NOT eqivalents of the corresponding things in 
>>> the Linz or Sipser proofs.
>>>
>>
>> OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THE BASIS OF THE SUBJECT LINE OF THIS POST
> 
> Nope, necessary condition to talk, about the subject line
> 
>>
>> *I ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY MORE DISHONEST DODGE*
>> *STRAW-MAN DECEPTION CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT FAKE REBUTTALS*
>>
> 
> And I will not tolerate any more of your lies, so we need to nail down 
> the meaning of your definitions BEFORE we use them.
> 
> You have been PROVEN to be a liar, and a pathological liar with a 
> reckless disregard for the truth, so we need to have argement before, 
> because your history is that you will just claim the falsehoods after if 
> you get what you want.
> 

WHEN I MAKE SURE TO PIN YOU DOWN YOU CANNOT EVEN SHOW THAT I
AM MISTAKEN SO I WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST ON PINNING YOU DOWN.

WHEN I MAKE SURE TO PIN YOU DOWN YOU CANNOT EVEN SHOW THAT I
AM MISTAKEN SO I WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST ON PINNING YOU DOWN.

WHEN I MAKE SURE TO PIN YOU DOWN YOU CANNOT EVEN SHOW THAT I
AM MISTAKEN SO I WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST ON PINNING YOU DOWN.

It has already been proven that tolerating
*STRAW-MAN DECEPTION CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT FAKE REBUTTALS*
cannot possibly ever get anywhere.

*THIS NEW POLICY MAKES TROLLING ME UTTERLY IMPOTENT*
Thus if trolling me is your only intent then you will
only get boilerplate replies from me.

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