Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating
 itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 14:49:48 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <vhdktc$qirt$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me>
 <286747edde7812d05b1bdf4f59af1cffdd44e95a@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 21:49:51 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f412909ad9be764d47e6636298420ea3";
	logging-data="871293"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18WNPq1vGSypwHoVA5Qcnai"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8i55gwiI9gnbfcN4teMbwl/9P7I=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <286747edde7812d05b1bdf4f59af1cffdd44e95a@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241117-2, 11/17/2024), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4127

On 11/17/2024 1:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/17/24 1:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>>    return;
>> }
>>
>> _DDD()
>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp
>> [00002183] c3         ret
>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>
>> DDD emulated by any encoding of HHH that emulates N
>> to infinity number of steps of DDD cannot possibly
>> reach its "return" instruction final halt state.
>>
> 
> Except your DDD *CAN'T BE EMULTATED* by *ANY* HHH, as it is IMPOSSIBLE 
> to emulate the Call HHH per the x86 language from your input, as the 
> data isn't tnere.
> 

In patent law this is called incorporation by reference.
I referred to every element of an infinite set of encodings
of HHH. You already know that it is ridiculously stupid
that you suggest I should write them all down.

When each of them correctly emulates N instructions of its
input then N instructions have been correctly emulated. It
is despicably dishonest of you to say that when N instructions
have been correctly emulated that no instructions have been
correctly emulating.

>> This applies to every DDD emulated by any HHH no
>> matter the recursive depth of emulation. Thus it is
>> a verified fact that the input to HHH never halts.
>>
> 
> But since NO HHH can do the first part of your requirements, that of 
> actually emulating the input, you are just proved to be an lying idiot.
> 
> Also, Computation Theory isn't interested in Subjective Non-semantic 
> problems like yours, but only objective problems, especially those that 
> are semantic (which means one that actually IS based on the FINAL 
> behavior, after an unbounded number of steps) properties.
> 
> Your ignorance of that fact just shows your utter stupidity.
> 
> It doesn't what the emulation of HHH is, if it is only finite, only the 
> unbounded emulation of that input (Which will be halting if that DDD is 
> based on an HHH that answers after finite time).
> 
> THe HHH that DOES a semantic emulation unfortunately never answers, so 
> fails to be the needed decider.
> 
> So, you just struck out twice.
> 
> You then keep on lying about it, which gets your ejected from the logic 
> pool..
> 
> Sorry, that is just the facts, you are showing you are just too stupid 
> to have your idea have any merits, and thus even if there was something 
> to your ideas, you have probably successfully killed them.


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