Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid
 rebuttals ---PSR---
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 15:17:13 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <vqd3cp$34sev$4@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> <vqbp6h$2td95$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqcvr3$34c3r$4@dont-email.me> <vqd0hc$34ing$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqd2i4$34sev$1@dont-email.me> <vqd39j$34ing$2@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 22:17:14 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1c6e0bbc6933c472882837758b37c8c5";
	logging-data="3305951"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+G4pePG/ZByF6NkMDZKDl3"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FN9WQqTDcol07YNqhOieN6EDItI=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250306-6, 3/6/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <vqd39j$34ing$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 7317

On 3/6/2025 3:15 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 3/6/2025 4:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/6/2025 2:28 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 3/6/2025 3:16 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 3/6/2025 3:17 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> 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
>>>>>> *Replacing the code of HHH with an unconditional simulator and 
>>>>>> subsequently running HHH(DD) 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.
>>>>
>>>> The finite string of replacing the code of HHH with an unconditional 
>>>> simulator and subsequently running HHH(DD)
>>>> specifies recursive emulation that cannot possibly
>>>> reach its own "ret" instruction BECAUSE IT SPECIFIES
>>>> RECURSINVE EMULATION.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Makes sense
>>
>> Whether or not the code of HHH is replaced
>> Replacing the code of HHH with an unconditional simulator and 
>> subsequently running HHH(DD) cannot possibly reach
>> its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.
> 
> Yes, that makes sense.  Now what?

BF Skinner's extinction

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer