Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid
 rebuttals ---PSR---
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 16:03:33 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <vqae74$2ivcn$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vq5qqc$1j128$2@dont-email.me> <vq6g9l$1ptg9$2@dont-email.me>
 <vq722k$1tapm$1@dont-email.me> <vq751g$1t7oc$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq78ni$1u8bl$3@dont-email.me>
 <5e786c32c2dcc88be50183203781dcb6a5d8d046@i2pn2.org>
 <vq866t$23nt0$1@dont-email.me>
 <2002d599ebdfb7cd5a023881ab2faca9801b219d@i2pn2.org>
 <vq8l3d$29b9l$1@dont-email.me>
 <4426787ad065bfd0939e10b937f3b8b2798d0578@i2pn2.org>
 <vq8mam$29b9l$5@dont-email.me>
 <920b573567d204a5c792425b09097d79ee098fa5@i2pn2.org>
 <vq9lvn$2ei4j$3@dont-email.me>
 <4453bc0c1141c540852ea2223a7fedefc93f564c@i2pn2.org>
 <vqadoh$2ivg7$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 22:03:33 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cc0bffe0b083240e269e1b5bec2a28a8";
	logging-data="2719127"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+3/iEtsu33TCck2V812gjc"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mU6OLIOle7F0Z8XF4c+qcrc4uTY=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vqadoh$2ivg7$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4290

On 3/5/2025 3:55 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/5/2025 10:14 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Wed, 05 Mar 2025 08:10:00 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 3/5/2025 6:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/5/25 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/4/2025 11:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/4/25 11:48 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/4/2025 10:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/4/25 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/4/2025 5:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/4/25 11:11 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/4/2025 9:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 04.mrt.2025 om 15:17 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/4/2025 3:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 04.mrt.2025 om 04:07 schreef olcott:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, my claim remains: HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction,
>>>>>>>>>>>> where the direct execution and some world-class simulators have
>>>>>>>>>>>> no problem to reach it.
>>>>>>>>>>> DD calls its own emulator when emulated by HHH.
>>>>>>>>>>> DD DOES NOT call its own emulator when emulated by HHH1. DD DOES
>>>>>>>>>>> NOT call its own emulator when directly executed.
>>>>>>>>>> Which just show your stupidity, as DD doesn't HAVE its own
>>>>>>>>>> emulator, and CAN'T know who or if it is being emulated.
>>>>>>>>> It is not my stupidity it is your dishonestly using the straw-man
>>>>>>>>> deception to change the subject away from:
>>>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret"
>>>>>>>>> instruction and terminate normally.
>>>>>>>> WHich is the strawman, that you are too stupid to recogines.
>>>>>>> I will show that it is not straw-man after you quit dodging that
>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>> Wrong order,
>>>>> I WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY OTHER ORDER
>>>> In other words, you CAN'T handle any other order, even though logically
>>>> requried, because you need to hide your fraud.
>>> My proof requires a specific  prerequisite order.
>>> One cannot learn algebra before one has learned to count to ten.
>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret"
>>> instruction and terminate normally.
>>> Is the first step of the mandatory prerequisite order of my proof
>> What is the next step?
>>
> 
> *DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach*
> *its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally*
> 
> It has taken two years to create this first step such that it
> is the the simplest way to state the key element of the
> whole proof and make this element impossible to correctly refute.
> 
> EVERY ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT AWAY FROM THIS POINT
> IS DISHONEST.
> 

Before agreeing on an answer, it is first required to agree on the question.