Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar

On 12/2/24 10:13 PM, olcott wrote:

On 12/2/2024 9:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 12/2/24 9:46 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/28/2024 1:48 PM, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:57:23 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 11/28/2024 11:06 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/28/24 11:43 AM, olcott wrote:

On 11/28/2024 9:47 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/28/24 10:01 AM, olcott wrote:

>

DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its "ret" instruction
final halt state.

>
But that DDD CAN'T be emulated more than 4 instructions by ANY pure
function, as you can't emulate past the call HHH instruction.
>

You just aren't paying any attention at all or are woefully inaccurate
in your word choice. HHH1 does emulate all of DDD.
HHH1 <is> a pure function.

Strawman. We are talking about HHH.
>

>
HHH1 has identical source-code to HHH the only difference
is that DDD does not call HHH at all, thus does not call
HHH in recursive emulation.
>
*You said*
    DDD CAN'T be emulated more than 4 instructions by
    ANY pure function...
>
Sure it can! It can be emulated by pure function HHH1
>
It HHH1 an element of the set of pure functions?
YES IT IS THUS YOU ARE WRONG !!!
>
>

>
>
Nope, becuase if HHH1 looks at the machine code of HHH, which wasn't part of its input, it isn.t a pure function, BY DEFINITION.
>

 How the Hell do you think that you can get away with
saying that HHH is not part of the input to HHH1?
 

Because you have defined that the input is JUST the x86 machine code of DDD.
If you include the code of HHH as part of your input, then you can't make you claim about no emulator HHH can emulate this input from 1 to infinte number of steps, as the input will ALWAYS have the one particular HHH that it was built on in it or it is clearly a different input.
How the hell do you think something you have specifically EXCLUDED can be part of the input.
Or, are you admitting that you are giving a DIFFENT input to HHH1 than to HHH"?
You are just caught in your LIES, for which you WILL BE judged.