Path: ...!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: DDD correctly emulated by HHH --- Correct Emulation Defined 2
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 22:48:39 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <vrlbun$2ude6$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vrgme1$2tr56$1@dont-email.me>
 <vri5mn$6nv4$1@dont-email.me>
 <8354fe5751e03a767452a3999818d5c6da714a6b@i2pn2.org>
 <vrigh6$f35v$1@dont-email.me> <vrj6d3$14iuu$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrjog0$1ilbe$6@dont-email.me>
 <db8aa67218b2a0990cd1df38aca29dbd3930e145@i2pn2.org>
 <vrkumg$2l2ci$2@dont-email.me>
 <ba957e964c1090cbb801b1688b951ac095281737@i2pn2.org>
 <vrl2s6$2nttr$2@dont-email.me>
 <0dcfe335c6d19cb5902f937f5a6a1c908e060118@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 04:48:39 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2f916a71d8198685241611f1fae38067";
	logging-data="3093958"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19UGOJTcuWp32rwgBRxowkm"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FDoMpLisvHH706aHVhjD5R/ZbRQ=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <0dcfe335c6d19cb5902f937f5a6a1c908e060118@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250321-4, 3/21/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 3928

On 3/21/2025 9:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/21/25 9:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/21/2025 7:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 3/21/25 8:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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]
>>>>
>>>> For every HHH at machine address 000015d2 that emulates
>>>> a finite number of steps of DDD according to the
>>>> semantics of the x86 programming language no DDD
>>>> ever reaches its own "ret" instruction halt state.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So, you demonstrate your utter stupidity and use of incorrect 
>>> definitions.
>>>
>>> For EVERY HHH at machine address 000015d2 that emulates just a finite 
>>> number of steps and return, then the PROGRAM DDD 
>>
>> does not exist because HHH is invoked from main()
>>
>>
> 
> SO you admit to misdefining your system.
> 

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}

int main()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}

I only admit that you have been dishonestly trying to
get away with the straw-man deception for at least
two years.

> Halt Deciders take PROGRAM (via a finite string representation) as their 
> input. If DDD isn't a program, you can't ask about its halting behavior.
> 

The x86 machine code is the relevant example.
Since Turing machines cannot possibly directly examine
the behavior of other Turing machines halt deciders
must base their entire halting decision on the behavior
that this finite string actually specifies.

You seem brain dead on this point.

> Note, if HHH is a program, then by the basic princples of programs, it 
> can be made into a sub-program of another program. That is a basic part 
> of a system being Turing Complete.
> 
> I guess your idea of programs are that your system is not Turing Complete.
> 
> Sorry, you are just proving your stupidity.


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