Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 07:28:19 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 211 Message-ID: References: <17dd1e646a0cd01f94d9505a9be90fd3925add12@i2pn2.org> <5945fb90e23e2b78a90da47de02bd8e6d8c3ec4d@i2pn2.org> <8c25d20279cfad6662137025897575068e10fe39@i2pn2.org> <7ccf1daed71803939ed9acc5dc0f436e46bbfba2@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:28:20 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="82335070d8bf9370532060f5e42bce15"; logging-data="32979"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/VRsWDK40oNBB1Kh1ZHNbS" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:z2Z/3GMUdf8akRmM1fQKnJYf8DM= X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241126-6, 11/26/2024), Outbound message In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 11817 On 11/27/2024 6:14 AM, Richard Damon wrote: > olcott wrote: >> On 11/26/2024 7:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 11/25/24 11:08 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 11/24/2024 11:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 11/24/24 9:30 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 11/23/2024 11:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 11/23/24 11:54 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 9:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/24 9:04 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/23/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-22 16:45:52 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2024 2:30 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-21 15:32:38 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/21/2024 3:12 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-20 22:03:43 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2024 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-20 03:23:12 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/19/2024 4:12 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-18 20:42:02 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/18/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The "the mapping" on the subject line is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct. The subject line >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not specify which mapping and there is no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> larger context that could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specify that. Therefore it should be "a mapping". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> void DDD() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    return; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _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] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any encoding of HHH that emulates N >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to infinity number of steps of DDD cannot possibly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reach its "return" instruction final halt state. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instructions before tha >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach the instruction after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH call. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it cannot reach return instruction of HHH. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This applies to every DDD emulated by any HHH no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter the recursive depth of emulation. Thus it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a verified fact that the input to HHH never halts. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is too vague to be regareded true or false. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is perfectly possibe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to define two programs and call them DDD and HHH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What a jackass. DDD and HHH have been fully specified >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for many months. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are specified in a way that makes your "every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD" and "any DDD" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bad (perhaps even incorrect) use of Common language. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I specify the infinite sets with each element numbered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the top of page 2 of my paper. Back in April of 2023 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have also specifed that HHH is the program in your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitHub repository. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should I assume that you must be lying about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this because you did not quote where I did this? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you may assume that I was confused by your lack of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clarity and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in particular by your bad choice of names. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you clearly state that HHH is not the function HHH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in your GitHub repository then I needn't to consider the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possiblity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you just triying to deceive by equivcation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH is one concrete example of an infinite set of instances >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such that DDD is emulated by HHH N times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That sentence says that there is only one HHH, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradicting your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earlier statement that HHH is a generic term for every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> member of some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be a damned liar: "infinite set of instances" >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean you lied when you said "one concrete example"? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> One element of an infinite set does not say there >>>>>>>>>>>> is no infinite set. Is says there is an infinite set. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But one element of an infinite set is not the infinite set. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You are just showing that your logic is based on proven >>>>>>>>>>> incorrect set theory. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> IF HHH is an ELEMENT of the set, then it is that one element >>>>>>>>>>> for the entire evaluation, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Liar: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A proof by induction consists of two cases. The first, the base >>>>>>>>>> case, >>>>>>>>>> proves the statement for n=0 without assuming any knowledge of >>>>>>>>>> other cases. The second case, the induction step, proves that if >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> statement holds for any given case n=k, then it must also hold for >>>>>>>>>> the next case n=k+1. These two steps establish that the statement >>>>>>>>>> holds for every natural number n. The base case does not >>>>>>>>>> necessarily >>>>>>>>>> begin with n=0, but often with n=1, and possibly with any fixed >>>>>>>>>> natural >>>>>>>>>> number n=N, establishing the truth of the statement for all natural >>>>>>>>>> numbers n ≥ N. >>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And when have you ever provided such a proof for your statement? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> NOWHERE >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your problem is you don't even have a logical basis to express >>>>>>>>> your statements in, so you can't do an induction on them. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, you are just demonstrating that your "logic" is based on the >>>>>>> meaningless use of buzzwords that you don't understand, but can >>>>>>> parrot their unlearned meaning, but have no idea how to actually use. >>>>>>> ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========