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: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:57:24 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v5ku94$1as00$4@i2pn2.org>
References: <v598l4$c4if$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>
 <v5jp08$2o58l$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 23:57:24 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1404928"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v5jp08$2o58l$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 10550
Lines: 234

On 6/27/24 9:21 AM, olcott wrote:
> 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

But you still can not say that something is "Possible" if it actually 
can not be.

or

□¬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

Right, because that isn't something I care to share about with you, 
since it is clear that you are not a true believer, and thus couldn't 
understand the discussion.

> 
>>
>> 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.
>>>
>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========