Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:12:21 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <vhmthl$j0ao$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vhdd32$oq0l$1@dont-email.me> <vhf257$16a9p$1@dont-email.me> <vhg8qq$1duv3$1@dont-email.me> <vhho9r$1pkdu$1@dont-email.me> <vhjkn0$28t3s$2@dont-email.me> <vhkbia$1md6$1@dont-email.me> <vhlmbv$9l59$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 10:12:22 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b4dcbcf5c86b7a5e9dc6c30ffc3c299d";
	logging-data="622936"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18mFT8g9lkZFGEPuTWNkMs9"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MUoY/uKf33oIcsu1uYCSJB/3hpc=
Bytes: 4005

On 2024-11-20 22:03:43 +0000, olcott said:

> On 11/20/2024 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-11-20 03:23:12 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 11/19/2024 4:12 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-11-18 20:42:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 11/18/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> The "the mapping" on the subject line is not correct. The subject line
>>>>>> does not specify which mapping and there is no larger context that could
>>>>>> specify that. Therefore it should be "a mapping".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instructions before tha return.
>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instruction after the HHH call.
>>>>>> Because it cannot reach return instruction of HHH.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That is too vague to be regareded true or false. It is perfectly possibe
>>>>>> to define two programs and call them DDD and HHH
>>>>> 
>>>>> What a jackass. DDD and HHH have been fully specified
>>>>> for many months.
>>>> 
>>>> They are specified in a way that makes your "every DDD" and "any DDD"
>>>> bad (perhaps even incorrect) use of Common language.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I specify the infinite sets with each element numbered
>>> on the top of page 2 of my paper. Back in April of 2023
>>> 
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D 
>>> 
>> 
>> You have also specifed that HHH is the program in your GitHub repository.
>> 
> 
> Should I assume that you must be lying about
> this because you did not quote where I did this?

No, you may assume that I was confused by your lack of clarity and
in particular by your bad choice of names.

If you clearly state that HHH is not the function HHH that you have
in your GitHub repository then I needn't to consider the possiblity
that you just triying to deceive by equivcation.

-- 
Mikko