Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid
 rebuttals ---PSR---
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 10:17:04 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <vqbp6h$2td95$2@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> <vqae74$2ivcn$1@dont-email.me>
 <3d74bde656131ddb2a431901b3a0aeeb71649e70@i2pn2.org>
 <vqb9ao$2mueq$6@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 10:17:06 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f5f1ef8f37cb1ccf7626c4876859d11b";
	logging-data="3061029"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19vFzGtCI7j1+v9/Iw8TAmK"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TrmueubUSL8ql+ilRAwrBx7zvAI=
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vqb9ao$2mueq$6@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5525

Op 06.mrt.2025 om 05:46 schreef olcott:
> On 3/5/2025 5:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/5/25 4:03 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Which is the problem, since you don't have the correct question.
>>
>> If HHH is a Halt Decider / Termination analyzer, the ONLY behavior 
>> that matters is the behavior of the directly executed program whose 
>> description is provided.
>>
> 
> That is a stupid thing to say.
> HHH computes the mapping to a return value on the
> basis of what its finite string INPUT specifies.
> 
> THIS IS WHAT IT SPECIFIES
> *DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach*
> *its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally*
Yes, that is what HHH reports: I cannot complete the simulation up to 
the end. No more, no less.
There are easier ways to make a program to report the failure of a 
simulation.