Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Even Google AI Overview understands me now --- different
 execution traces have different behavior !!!
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 22:39:55 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <vdt0qb$13k0s$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vdgpbs$2nmcm$1@dont-email.me> <vdi0f8$2u1aq$1@dont-email.me>
 <53a60609211a04a123adafa525bac39b5cbc6959@i2pn2.org>
 <vdjlum$38t86$4@dont-email.me>
 <bf681f4404a7df8e3ffc2059dcd7c5c302aeeff1@i2pn2.org>
 <vdkud3$3ipp4$1@dont-email.me>
 <8b646269ba7736c125f0b05a1d764d73540f16e0@i2pn2.org>
 <vdn6sj$3thq0$1@dont-email.me>
 <1263d37668d0fd03df0ab5f9617387ca66ba4f0e@i2pn2.org>
 <vdnl13$3089$1@dont-email.me>
 <5f8d06fc4934a789b337fe9924553e34f9a45586@i2pn2.org>
 <vdp7q7$8eot$3@dont-email.me>
 <ab89296446c0b7827f304f138347765967baf478@i2pn2.org>
 <vdq66f$jf7k$1@dont-email.me>
 <316810021a1addeb9ee56d7ee33f3d2f6cf6624d@i2pn2.org>
 <vdrb0g$oita$2@dont-email.me>
 <37e4a5967ff2e6b55cfdab86589287346e7f3068@i2pn2.org>
 <vdrf9g$p6ih$1@dont-email.me>
 <58a96f19f9bba519e879f8f0847866bd0340f8b5@i2pn2.org>
 <vdrfpa$p6ih$2@dont-email.me>
 <a09854f996cf58ab0e11bcf8608d2d2bc980b65d@i2pn2.org>
 <vdsuc4$13cch$1@dont-email.me>
 <283b9f2c331c81b03e5cff7848836aa741e1702e@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 05:39:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8241962fd725da77d4713a73e4f1f7dc";
	logging-data="1167388"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19GyW8HJrYDkR8ld6X7Hiiw"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ufa5uWLGoAgDzWF/No8FRAM7vvI=
In-Reply-To: <283b9f2c331c81b03e5cff7848836aa741e1702e@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3970

On 10/5/2024 10:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/5/24 10:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/5/2024 9:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/5/24 9:43 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/5/2024 8:38 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/5/24 9:34 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/5/2024 8:27 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/5/24 8:21 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/5/2024 5:58 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/4/24 9:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That you are unable to understand that it is easily conclusively
>>>>>>>> proven (below) that the emulated HHH does emulate its DDD correctly
>>>>>>>> is why your double-talk gibberish rebuttal fails.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, the trace actually proves the opposite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following execution trace conclusively proves that
>>>>>> HHH emulated by itself does emulate the first four lines
>>>>>> of DDD correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, and then makes the error of PRESUMEING INCORREDTLY that 
>>>>> HHH(DDD) will not return,
>>>>
>>>> That this is over-your-head really is not my mistake.
>>>> *DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly return*
>>>
>>> No, it is beyond YOUR head that the fact that HHH does abort its 
>>> emulation means its doesn't show if the HHH that it was emulating 
>>> will return on not.
>>>
>>
>> This is simply over your head.
>> The infinite set of DDD emulated by HHH
>> never returns no matter what its corresponding HHH does.
> 
> No, that is just a false statement based on you changing the meaning of 
> the words.
> 
> EVERY DDD that calls an HHH(DDD) that ever returns an answer will halt.
> 

No DDD emulated by any corresponding HHH ever returns
and the HHH that emulates it does return an answer
corresponding to this behavior of this emulated DDD.



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