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: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating
 itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 19:15:41 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 254
Message-ID: <vi8g7t$85ij$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vhdd32$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$2@dont-email.me> <vhmthl$j0ao$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhnjqm$mjea$2@dont-email.me> <vhpffl$13p8e$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhqcg0$18k1i$1@dont-email.me> <vhs21l$1kglp$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhsncn$1nu6d$1@dont-email.me>
 <17dd1e646a0cd01f94d9505a9be90fd3925add12@i2pn2.org>
 <vhsri7$1ojus$1@dont-email.me>
 <5945fb90e23e2b78a90da47de02bd8e6d8c3ec4d@i2pn2.org>
 <vht1c8$1pgbs$1@dont-email.me>
 <8c25d20279cfad6662137025897575068e10fe39@i2pn2.org>
 <vhvdac$28qs1$2@dont-email.me>
 <7ccf1daed71803939ed9acc5dc0f436e46bbfba2@i2pn2.org>
 <vi3hj5$3ad5d$1@dont-email.me>
 <d69b59d8743dd2713e16ca41604ff30b4741b82d@i2pn2.org>
 <GcudnQRbD7HyPNv6nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <vi72fe$dbk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi76pj$106j$2@dont-email.me>
 <db87472521a4e553e992c6933a235dec24fb002f@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 02:15:42 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3e0dc11180449ab61a5121380b7b63f6";
	logging-data="267859"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX194bZmwEBfTDRYjhI0xR+6u"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BTwoLRSiTZ3Q6nXyLUXKkjx9MPo=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <db87472521a4e553e992c6933a235dec24fb002f@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241127-6, 11/27/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 13412

On 11/27/2024 8:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/27/24 8:28 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 11/27/2024 6:14 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/26/2024 7:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 11/25/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/24/2024 11:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/24/24 9:30 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 11:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 9:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-22 16:45:52 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2024 2:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-21 15:32:38 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/21/2024 3:12 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH is one concrete example of an infinite set of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instances
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such that DDD is emulated by HHH N times.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That sentence says that there is only one HHH,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradicting your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earlier statement that HHH is a generic term for every
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> member of some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be a damned liar: "infinite set of instances"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean you lied when you said "one concrete example"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One element of an infinite set does not say there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no infinite set. Is says there is an infinite set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But one element of an infinite set is not the infinite set.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are just showing that your logic is based on proven
>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorrect set theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IF HHH is an ELEMENT of the set, then it is that one element
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the entire evaluation,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Liar:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A proof by induction consists of two cases. The first, the base
>>>>>>>>>>>> case,
>>>>>>>>>>>> proves the statement for n=0 without assuming any knowledge of
>>>>>>>>>>>> other cases. The second case, the induction step, proves 
>>>>>>>>>>>> that if
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> statement holds for any given case n=k, then it must also 
>>>>>>>>>>>> hold for
>>>>>>>>>>>> the next case n=k+1. These two steps establish that the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> statement
>>>>>>>>>>>> holds for every natural number n. The base case does not
>>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========