Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.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: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 20:01:41 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <v3r1pl$16gjs$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3o2dj$jm9q$1@dont-email.me> <v3og6b$328ec$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v3ogh9$pi6u$1@dont-email.me> <v3oi5t$328ec$13@i2pn2.org>
 <v3oifv$psat$1@dont-email.me> <v3ojg2$328eb$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v3ok3p$q2fh$1@dont-email.me> <v3ol8s$328ec$14@i2pn2.org>
 <v3olkf$q9du$1@dont-email.me> <v3piaa$33gmb$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v3plp1$v133$2@dont-email.me> <v3qsi6$354ia$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 03:01:42 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4cb2a3366a4bdb85a28904f6e3988fec";
	logging-data="1262204"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+IAC6jt/QeiVRKylyfkRgj"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/9G/KgKd5aCYIwJg4gRv8MHKNXE=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v3qsi6$354ia$1@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4576

On 6/5/2024 6:32 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/5/24 8:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/5/2024 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/4/24 11:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/4/2024 10:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/4/24 10:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 9:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/4/24 10:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 9:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/4/24 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/4/24 5:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://liarparadox.org/DD_correctly_simulated_by_HH_is_Proven.pdf
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact 
>>>>>>>>>>>> that the above
>>>>>>>>>>>> link conclusively proves that DD <is> correctly simulated by 
>>>>>>>>>>>> HH.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been just like I smash a Boston cream pie in their 
>>>>>>>>>>>> face and they
>>>>>>>>>>>> persistently deny that there ever was any pie as this pie 
>>>>>>>>>>>> drips from
>>>>>>>>>>>> their face.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The problem iks you use the WRONG DEFINITION of "Simulated 
>>>>>>>>>>> Correctly" to allow the simulation to say anything about the 
>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the machine being simulated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *I conclusively proved otherwise in the above link*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You CAN'T provd that a definition is wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Try and provide a counter-example or implicitly admit that you 
>>>>>>>> cannot*
>>>>>>>> *Try and provide a counter-example or implicitly admit that you 
>>>>>>>> cannot*
>>>>>>>> *Try and provide a counter-example or implicitly admit that you 
>>>>>>>> cannot*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What are you asking for a counter example of?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The machine description of DD specifies that it does not halt to
>>>>>> simulating halt decider HH and you already know that you cannot
>>>>>> possibly prove otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it specifies that it HALTS, since HH(DD,DD) will return 0.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In other words you have always known that I am correct
>>>> that DD correctly simulated by HH CANNOT POSSIBLY HALT
>>>> and yet still try to get away with pure bluster.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are talking in circles and keep on changing topics, possible 
>>> because you just don't know what you are talking about, or possible, 
>>> your medication has made your brain too fuzzy.
>>>
>>
>> *It is a proven fact that directly executed DD(DD) has*
>> *different behavior than DD correctly simulated by HH*
>> *One can lie about this yet this lie is easily exposed*
> 
> Then HH does not correctly simulate the input per the definition of 
> computation theory (or the general concept of a correct simulation)
> 
> PERIOD.

*This unequivocally proves the behavior of DD correctly simulated by HH*
https://liarparadox.org/DD_correctly_simulated_by_HH_is_Proven.pdf

*That you cannot find any error seems to prove that you are a liar*




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