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: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals ---PSR--- Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2025 11:07:45 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 95 Message-ID: References: <4426787ad065bfd0939e10b937f3b8b2798d0578@i2pn2.org> <920b573567d204a5c792425b09097d79ee098fa5@i2pn2.org> <4453bc0c1141c540852ea2223a7fedefc93f564c@i2pn2.org> <27b6da57f540cd39d2918411d8c94789678e3f45@i2pn2.org> <24c66a3611456f6a6969dc132fd8a227b26cbcbd@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2025 10:07:46 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="31447595eaef0533ab17be3120d39290"; logging-data="88982"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19wgLllPRmJsfw0o3F59k2D" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:aahPTBOgFkaWr8IYJwL1I36IhJQ= Bytes: 5857 On 2025-03-07 15:28:38 +0000, olcott said: > On 3/7/2025 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/6/25 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/6/2025 6:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 3/6/25 3:18 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 3/6/2025 3:20 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>> Am Wed, 05 Mar 2025 22:03:39 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 9:57 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 10:53 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 9:31 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 10:17 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/5/2025 7:10 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, you know that what you're working on has nothing to >>>>>>>>>>>> do with the halting problem, but you don't care. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In other words I WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY BULLSHIT DEFLECTION. >>>>>>>>>>> You have proven that you know these things pretty well SO QUIT THE >>>>>>>>>>> SHIT! >>>>>>>>>> You want people to accept that HHH(DD) does in fact report that >>>>>>>>>> changing the code of HHH to an unconditional simulator and running >>>>>>>>>> HHH(DD) will not halt. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>>>>>>> instruction and terminate normally. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In other words, replacing the code of HHH with an unconditional >>>>>>>> simulator and subsequently running HHH(DD) does not halt, which you >>>>>>>> previously agreed is correct: >>>>>>>> On 2/22/2025 1:02 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>   > On 2/22/2025 11:10 AM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>   >> On 2/22/2025 11:43 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>   >>> The first point is DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly >>>>>>>>   >>> terminate normally by reaching its own "return" instruction. >>>>>>>>   >> >>>>>>>>   >> In other words, if the code of HHH is replaced with an >>>>>>>>   >> unconditional simulator then it can be shown that DD is >>>>>>>>   >> non-halting and therefore HHH(DD)==0 is correct. >>>>>>>>   >> >>>>>>>>   > Wow finally someone that totally gets it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you disagree, explain why this is different. >>>>>>>> In particular, give an example where X correctly emulated by Y is >>>>>>>> different from replacing the code of Y with an unconditional simulator >>>>>>>> and subsequently running Y(X). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I may not have enough time left to change the subject and endlessly go >>>>>>> through anything but the exact point. >>>>> >>>>>> You used to have enough time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is before the CAR T cell manufacturing process failed twice. >>>> >>>> Which really means you need to abandon your fraudulent methods >>> >>> _DD() >>> [00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>> [00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>> [00002136] 51         push ecx      ; make space for local >>> [00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD >>> [0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD) >>> [00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04 >>> [00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax >>> [00002147] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00 >>> [0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f >>> [0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d >>> [0000214f] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04] >>> [00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp >>> [00002154] 5d         pop ebp >>> [00002155] c3         ret >>> Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155] >>> >>> DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly >>> reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally >>> because DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive emulation. >>> >> >> No, > > You could show the machine-address by machine-address > correct execution trace if i was wrong. You only > dodge this because you k ow that I am correct. > >> and your problem is still that you are trying to hold to you admitted FRAUD. > > Using ad hominem instead of reasoning makes you > look very foolish. No ad hominem above. -- Mikko