Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!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: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise ---
 pinned down
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:38:31 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <v3fiq7$2rsbs$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <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>
 <v3dqka$2lfup$4@i2pn2.org> <v3dsev$2f6ul$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3dtt4$2lfup$5@i2pn2.org> <v3dvr3$2jgjd$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3e0rj$2lfup$6@i2pn2.org> <v3e1m6$2jmc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3f09p$2n53o$1@i2pn2.org> <v3feqn$2rdp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fgat$2n53n$5@i2pn2.org> <v3fhan$2rsbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3fi55$2n53o$6@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2024 18:38:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5617c6a52e82e3edb2307f1199229213";
	logging-data="3010940"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+xvCZVCstqR+/7L/nR1seA"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MDKM3xuAqjmeku4TYxtHF/0g1dc=
In-Reply-To: <v3fi55$2n53o$6@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5381

On 6/1/2024 11:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/1/24 12:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/1/2024 10:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/1/24 11:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> *I will not discuss any other points with you until after you either*
>>>> (a) Acknowledge that DD correctly simulated by HH and ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly
>>>>      simulated by embedded_H remain stuck in recursive simulation for
>>>>      1 to ∞ of correct simulation or
>>>>
>>>> (b) Correctly prove otherwise.
>>>
>>> And until you answer the question of what that actually means, I will 
>>> reply WHO CARES.
>>>
>>
>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>> 00       int HH(ptr p, ptr i);
>> 01       int DD(ptr p)
>> 02       {
>> 03         int Halt_Status = HH(p, p);
>> 04         if (Halt_Status)
>> 05           HERE: goto HERE;
>> 06         return Halt_Status;
>> 07       }
>> 08
>> 09       int main()
>> 10       {
>> 11         HH(DD,DD);
>> 12         return 0;
>> 13       }
>>
>> Every DD correctly simulated by any HH of the infinite set of HH/DD
>> pairs that match the above template never reaches past its own simulated
>> line 03 in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation of DD by HH.
>>
>> In this case HH is either a pure simulator that never halts or
>> HH is a pure function that stops simulating after some finite number
>> of simulated lines. The line count is stored in a local variable.
>> The pure function HH always returns the meaningless value of 56
>> after it stops simulating.
>>
> 
> So, still no answer, to teh question. 

You can pretend that you don't understand something that you do indeed
understand into perpetuity.

The key measure of dishonestly would be that you continue to say
that you don't understand yet never ever point out exactly what you
don't understand and why you don't understand it.

> I giuess that Mean YOU don't even 
> know what you are asking, though it seems that now you are admitting 
> that your HH doesn't actually ANSWER the question, so it isn't ACTUALL a 
> decider for any function except the "56" mapping.
> 
> I will repeat the question and until you answer the question of what 
> that actually means, I will reply WHO CARES.
> 
> DO you mean the simulation of the TEMPLATE DD, 

*Of course I don't mean that nonsense. I mean exactly what I specified*

> which means that we CAN'T 
> simulate the call HH as we have no code past point to simulate, and thus 
> your claim is just a LIE.
> 
> Or, do you mean a given instance of HH simulating a given instance of 
> DD, at which point we never have the 1 to infinte number of simulatons 
> of THAT INPUT, so your claim is just a LIE.
> 

Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...
Every element of the infinite set of every H/D pairs...

*Its not that hard when one refrains from dishonesty*
We can't even say that you forgot these details from one reply
to the next because the details are still in this same post.

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