Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!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 Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals ---PSR--- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 20:21:40 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 62 Message-ID: References: <2002d599ebdfb7cd5a023881ab2faca9801b219d@i2pn2.org> <4426787ad065bfd0939e10b937f3b8b2798d0578@i2pn2.org> <920b573567d204a5c792425b09097d79ee098fa5@i2pn2.org> <4453bc0c1141c540852ea2223a7fedefc93f564c@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2025 03:21:41 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3c1a9e9f5bdca80ea03a12b2b1cb28cf"; logging-data="4022946"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/uUIc4GQzdDS960ZUzYHwd" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:kaOD/yb8aEynpk01pfMRVvsYfQU= Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250307-8, 3/7/2025), Outbound message In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4514 On 3/7/2025 8:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 3/7/25 8:49 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/7/2025 10:25 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>> Op 07.mrt.2025 om 16:17 schreef olcott: >>>> On 3/7/2025 2:59 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 06.mrt.2025 om 21:13 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 3/6/2025 3:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 06.mrt.2025 om 04:53 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, we agree that HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction, >>>>>> >>>>>> Despicably dishonest attempt at the straw-man deception. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No rebuttal. So, we agree that HHH fails to reach the 'ret' >>>>> instruction. >>>> >>>> Not at all. Trying to get away with changing the subject >>>> WILL NOT BE TOLERATED. >>>> >>> If you do not agree that HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction >>> (that world-class simulators do reach, just as the direct execution >>> does), show how it reaches the 'ret' instruction. >> >> *set X* >> When-so-ever any input to any simulating termination >> analyzer calls the simulator that is simulating itself >> >> *result of set X* >> this input cannot possibly reach its own final state >> and terminate normally because it remains stuck in >> recursive emulation. > > But the failure of the PARTIAL emulatipon done by the termination > analyzer doesn't show that the input is non-haltiong > That is stupidly wrong and you know it. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer