Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:27:09 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:27:09 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3468870"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 11059 Lines: 198 On 6/7/24 12:13 PM, olcott wrote: > On 6/7/2024 10:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 07.jun.2024 om 17:29 schreef olcott: >>> On 6/7/2024 10:14 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 6/7/24 9:09 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 6/6/2024 10:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 6/6/24 10:56 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/6/2024 9:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/6/24 9:06 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 6/6/2024 6:11 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/24 12:14 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 11:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/24 12:04 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 10:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/24 11:44 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 10:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/24 11:11 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 10:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/24 10:43 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 9:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/24 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 8:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/24 9:18 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/5/2024 8:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nopoe, because it is based on the LIE that a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> partial simulation of a machine indicates what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it will do after the simulation stopped, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the simulation of a DIFFERENT machine tells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you of the behavior of a different machine then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *I will dumb it down for you some more* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Try any show how this DD can be correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by any HH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such that this DD reaches past its machine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> address [00001dbe] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I never said it could, you just are stuck in a bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then you aren't going to get anywhere, because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just don't care about that worthless claim. Only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you cross the line from talking about the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SUBJECTIVE answer that HH saw, to the OBJECTIVE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior of the machine the input represents to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halt Decider, will you get me caring, and slapping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you down hard with a factual rebuttal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *I will dumb it down for you some more* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Try any show how this DD can be correctly simulated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by any HH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such that this DD reaches past its machine address >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00001dbe] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I don't claim that it can. I won't go to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effort to confirm that it can't, because, frankly, I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't give a damn because it is MEANINGLESS. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct, because I am not willing to put that effort >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into your worthless claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct, because I am not willing to put that effort >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into your worthless claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are correct, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> because I am not willing to put that effort into your >>>>>>>>>>>>>> worthless claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are correct, >>>>>>>>>>>> because I am not willing to put that effort into your >>>>>>>>>>>> worthless claim. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT >>>>>>>>>>> UNTIL YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE >>>>>>>>>>> THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are correct, >>>>>>>>>> because I am not willing to put that effort into your >>>>>>>>>> worthless claim. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MY PROOF* >>>>>>>>> *THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MY PROOF* >>>>>>>>> *THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MY PROOF* >>>>>>>>> *THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MY PROOF* >>>>>>>>> *THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MY PROOF* >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> THUS THIS IS ALL THAT YOU WILL EVER GET TO TALK TO ME ABOUT UNTIL >>>>>>>>> YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM CORRECT OR YOU PROVE THAT I AM INCORRECT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But, as I said, I won't acknowledge that you are correct, >>>>>>>> because I am not willing to put that effort into your worthless >>>>>>>> claim. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then I am no longer willing to talk to you. >>>>>>> It is not a worthless claim it is the validation of the >>>>>>> essence of my life's work. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If the essence of your life's work is that you came up with a way >>>>>> to not-prove the thing you were trying to prove >>>>> >>>>> No you are just a Liar >>>> >>>> Then try to show it. >>>> >>> I conclusively prove my point and you finally admit that your whole >>> CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT strawman deception fake rebuttal has always simply >>> ignored the proof that I am correct shown below: >>> >>> Try to show how this DD correctly simulated by any HH ever >>> stops running without having its simulation aborted by HH. >>> >>> _DD() >>> [00001e12] 55         push ebp >>> [00001e13] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp >>> [00001e15] 51         push ecx >>> [00001e16] 8b4508     mov  eax,[ebp+08] >>> [00001e19] 50         push eax      ; push DD >>> [00001e1a] 8b4d08     mov  ecx,[ebp+08] >>> [00001e1d] 51         push ecx      ; push DD >>> [00001e1e] e85ff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH >>> >>> A {correct simulation} means that each instruction of the >>> above x86 machine language of DD is correctly simulated >>> by HH and simulated in the correct order. >> >> Does that imply that you think that the direct execution does not >> execute the instructions of the x86 machine language of DD correctly >> and in correct order? >> If both the simulation and the direct execution process the ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========