Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise ---
 pinned down
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 12:08:10 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v3fh1a$2n53o$5@i2pn2.org>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v37sap$18mfo$1@dont-email.me>
 <v38eq4$2foi0$1@i2pn2.org> <v38fe0$1bndb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v38g31$2foi0$11@i2pn2.org> <v38gi5$1bndb$3@dont-email.me>
 <v38ici$2fohv$2@i2pn2.org> <v38j17$1c8ir$2@dont-email.me>
 <v38jgo$2foi0$14@i2pn2.org> <v38jv9$1c8ir$4@dont-email.me>
 <v39agi$1jiql$1@dont-email.me> <v39v3h$1mtd9$5@dont-email.me>
 <v3b9kj$2im02$1@i2pn2.org> <v3bale$222n5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bbs2$2im01$1@i2pn2.org> <v3bcre$22a8n$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bduk$2im01$2@i2pn2.org> <v3bedb$22f8h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3bfbm$2im01$3@i2pn2.org> <v3bg39$22o6m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3cbhu$2k3ld$1@i2pn2.org> <v3clo2$28p7n$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dft1$2lfup$1@i2pn2.org> <v3dhob$2dio8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dk0d$2lfup$2@i2pn2.org> <v3dkf2$2e2po$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dmnc$2lfup$3@i2pn2.org> <v3do66$2ejq2$1@dont-email.me>
 <MPG.40c4fbcb474992459896fd@reader.eternal-september.org>
 <v3f9ha$2qh0t$1@dont-email.me> <v3ffpc$2n53n$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v3fgfb$2riae$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:08:10 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2856056"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v3fgfb$2riae$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3999
Lines: 56

On 6/1/24 11:58 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/1/2024 10:46 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/1/24 10:00 AM, olcott wrote: >> DD correctly simulated by HH 
>> remains stuck in recursive simulation
>>> all the time it is simulated even when an infinite number of steps
>>> are simulated.
>>
>> So, are you admitting that HH just gets stuck and doesn't answer when 
>> asked HH(DD,DD)?
>>
> 
> Every DD correctly simulated by any HH remains stuck in recursive 
> simulation for 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.

So? Since you definition of "Correct Simulation" is non-canonical, that 
doesn't mean anything.

And you still haven't defined what you mean by this DD correctly 
simulated by HH, and thus which why you have lied abut the 1 to ∞ steps 
of correct simulation.

If DD is a template, then you can't simulate DD past the call HH 
instruction and thus don't get anywhere near to infinity.

If DD is a instance of the template, then each instance is only 
simulated for exactly on value of number of steps, so you are not 
talking about the same thing in the two parts of your statement and thus 
are making a type error.

> 
> As I have repeatedly told you hundreds of times DD correctly
> simulated by pure simulator HH never gets past its own line 03
> and this HH does not halt.

So, when are you going to answer the question of what you mean by that 
to make it clear which part of your claim is the lie?

> 
> Also DD correctly simulated by pure function HH never gets past
> its own line 03 and THIS HH DOES HALT.

And who cares about the fact that DD didn't halt before its simulation 
was aborted?

> 
> If you really can't remember that from one post to the next I suggest
> that you print that out so that you can see it immediately before making
> any reply.
> 

Maybe you should answer the question put before you and not just be 
arguing with yourself.

Repeating non-responsive replies just shows that you don't know how to 
continue the discussion with an actual answer, because you. know you 
have been caught in a lie.