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: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 08:21:12 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 189
Message-ID: <v5jp08$2o58l$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v598l4$c4if$1@dont-email.me> <v5d81s$17fhi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5d8fr$10m6o$12@i2pn2.org> <v5d9iv$1bem6$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5d9s6$10m6p$10@i2pn2.org> <v5daji$1bll8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5db62$10m6o$13@i2pn2.org> <v5dckm$1bteo$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5e87h$12a1a$2@i2pn2.org> <v5ef4n$1ihbr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5frvi$14bcm$4@i2pn2.org> <v5fslr$1uc3o$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5fto2$14bcm$9@i2pn2.org> <v5fu06$1umhr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5fvtf$14bcn$3@i2pn2.org> <v5g1nr$1v8bm$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5g24k$14bcm$10@i2pn2.org> <v5g2ds$1v8bm$3@dont-email.me>
 <v5gs85$15l89$1@i2pn2.org> <v5h5c4$24jbd$9@dont-email.me>
 <v5i8vg$17ej1$3@i2pn2.org> <v5i9fh$2cko8$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5i9j2$17ej0$2@i2pn2.org> <v5ibfc$2cko8$5@dont-email.me>
 <v5icdm$17ej1$7@i2pn2.org> <v5ie9f$2dcfs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ieqg$17ej0$4@i2pn2.org> <v5ihn6$2hkk4$3@dont-email.me>
 <v5ijbq$17ej1$10@i2pn2.org> <v5ijq1$2i32s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ilj0$17ej1$15@i2pn2.org> <v5imqf$2ie27$3@dont-email.me>
 <v5jink$19368$1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 15:21:13 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d7b6b7ddfe8775f34f568700240d9d1b";
	logging-data="2888981"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19vYvQ4PL/rMy0W0ayfYEet"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:J90P22ybEaONcDHn6PSku7IAGp4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v5jink$19368$1@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 8886

On 6/27/2024 6:34 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/26/24 11:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/26/2024 10:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/26/24 10:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/26/2024 9:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/26/24 10:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/26/2024 8:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/26/24 9:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/26/2024 7:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/26/24 8:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/26/2024 6:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mike understands how your use of static variables is cheating.
>>>>>>>>>> Others here will be baffled and confused.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the rules are the rules, and you can't create rules you 
>>>>>>>>> didn't state.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you really have such brain damage that you cannot remember
>>>>>>>> that we already discussed this and closed it I will start
>>>>>>>> praying for you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if I am allowed, or even required to remember that, then I 
>>>>>>> can remember that your Hs are all designed to be Halt Deciders, 
>>>>>>> and thus the only correct behavior for their input is that of the 
>>>>>>> direct execution of the program the input represents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NONE-THE-LESS I WILL NOT TOLERATE YOU LEAPING TO THE CONCLUSION
>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT WITHOUT GOING THROUGH EVER SINGLE STEP.
>>>>>> *When you do this I will point out your specific deceit*
>>>>>
>>>>> But if you don't include the restriction, it isn't there, and the 
>>>>> fact we are so many steps ahead of you isn't grounds to say we 
>>>>> don't know what we know.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> YOU CAN'T FREAKING USE ANY STATIC LOCAL VARIABLES TO
>>>>>>>> CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR AND YOU KNOW WHY YOU CAN'T USE
>>>>>>>> THEM SO FREAKING QUIT IT !!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _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 x86 emulator H0 cannot possibly return.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But it does, it just isn't emulated by H0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THAT IS THE FREAKING DAMNED LIAR STRAW-MAN DECEPTION.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "Behavior" of the input is DEFINED by the semantics of the x86 
>>>>> instruction set.
>>>>>
>>>>> NO instruction, other than Halt, stops the processor from 
>>>>> continuing, thus the behavior of the input doesn't stop just 
>>>>> because the emulator stoped processing it.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I say that there are some people that are so poor
>>>>>> that they are starving to death and we must halt them
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you cannot (morally) say there is no need to help them
>>>>>> because rich people are not starving to death.
>>>>>
>>>>> RED HERRING.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christ taught in parables I teach in isomorphisms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But broken ones, that are just RED HERRING LIES.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, I know Christ, and you are NOT Christ, and it is almost 
>>>>> blasphemous for you to make that comparasion, especially since you 
>>>>> have claimed to be God in the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> THAT WILL send you to Gehenna.
>>>>
>>>> I am not the liar here. I think that we have gone
>>>> way beyond reasonable doubt that you have told lies.
>>>
>>> Really, so what statement have I said that isn't actually true.
>>>
>>> Not just that you disagree with it, since you have been proven to be 
>>> a liar, but that you can actualy preove to be untrtue.
>>>
>>> Your ignorance does not make my statements lies.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you are one of those "Christians" that believes
>>>> once saved always saved even if you commit genocide
>>>> for fun an profit.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope. You don't know me well, so you are just making your typical 
>>> wild guesses with no basis.
>>> That is what gets you in trouble every time.
>>>
>>
>> As ALWAYS I hypothesize possibilities.
> 
> No, you hypothesize thing that might be impossibe, which are just lies.
> 

This is merely your ignorance of how modal logic works.
Modal Logic operators defined
"◇" for "Possibly" and "□" for "Necessarily"
◇P ↔ ¬□¬P
□P ↔¬◇¬P

>> Since you neither confirmed nor denied it remains open.
> 
> It is unclear what "it" refers to, as usual for you.
> 

You neither affirmed nor denied whether you are
a once saved always saved Christian or not.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/are-christians-really-once-saved-always-saved.html

> 
> By normal grammer, it woudl be either that you hypothesize 
> possibiliteis, and I have shown some of your claimed immpossiblities are 
> just impossible, or the previous comment was that I might think that 
> "committing genocide for fun and profit" is something a saved person 
> might do.
> 
>>
>> You know that you are doing the best that you can to
>> disable an honest dialogue.
>>
>> I have backed you into a corner on some of your lies.
>>
> 
> What lies?
> 
> That seems to be one of your biggest lies, you claim others are lying to 
> try to disquise your own lies.
> 

The most important one is that the correct simulation
of DDD by Ho must ALWAYS have the same behavior as the
directly executed 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
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========