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: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 21:24:52 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v5d694$10m6p$8@i2pn2.org>
References: <v598l4$c4if$1@dont-email.me> <v5a7vs$smd4$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v5a8hi$hsjd$1@dont-email.me> <v5a9bi$smd4$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v5abdl$igvh$1@dont-email.me> <v5ac1p$smd4$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v5add4$isal$1@dont-email.me> <v5aebe$smd4$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v5aggb$jan3$1@dont-email.me> <v5ah6u$smd5$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v5ahkc$jgfe$1@dont-email.me> <v5ai8i$smd5$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v5aij8$nd1b$2@dont-email.me> <v5ajva$smd4$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v5akga$nr6u$1@dont-email.me> <v5aktu$smd4$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v5alis$o08r$1@dont-email.me> <v5alpo$smd5$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v5am7l$o31i$1@dont-email.me> <v5an1e$o6ib$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ao4p$smd4$10@i2pn2.org> <v5ap10$odqa$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5bjn9$ursa$1@i2pn2.org> <v5bt3m$v0vb$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5cuta$10m6o$2@i2pn2.org> <v5d0bf$162m0$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5d188$10m6p$6@i2pn2.org> <v5d1ev$16a8b$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5d1mm$10m6o$8@i2pn2.org> <v5d3b4$16k7k$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5d4gj$10m6o$9@i2pn2.org> <v5d54b$16ra5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5d5k5$10m6o$10@i2pn2.org> <v5d64a$172v7$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 01:24:52 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1071321"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v5d64a$172v7$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3375
Lines: 45

On 6/24/24 9:22 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/24/2024 8:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/24/24 9:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>
>>> D correctly simulated by H does not have the same behavior
>>> as the directly executed D(D) because
>>>
>>> the call from D to H(D,D) cannot possibly return when D
>>> is correctly simulated by H.
>>
>> Which just means that the D correctly simulated by H trace stops in 
>> the middle of the simulation of H, 
> 
> Why risk your salvation on head games?

What Head Games, I am just point out the truth, and where you are lying.

> 
> Anyone that totally understands the following code knows
> that you are lying about that.
> 
> void DDD()
> {
>    H0(DDD);
> }
> 
> _DDD()
> [00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
> [00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
> [00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
> [0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD)
> [0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
> [00002182] 5d               pop ebp
> [00002183] c3               ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
> 
> The call from DDD to H0(DDD) when DDD is correctly emulated
> by H0 cannot possibly return.
> 

Which mean NOTHING about halting, dispite all your FALSE CLAIMS.

Youare just following your father's lead and speaking in words that are 
only half true to tell your lies.