Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact

On Wed, 2024-06-05 at 23:14 -0500, 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
 
*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]
 
_DD()
[00001db2] 55 push ebp
[00001db3] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001db5] 51 push ecx
[00001db6] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00001db9] 50 push eax ; push DD
[00001dba] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00001dbd] 51 push ecx ; push DD
[00001dbe] e8bff5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH
 
*Mike Terry would admit it if he would pay attention*
*He is not a liar*
 
*This unequivocally proves the behavior of DD correctly simulated by HH*
https://liarparadox.org/DD_correctly_simulated_by_HH_is_Proven.pdf

You have been solving POO H for 20 years !!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-halting-problem-explained-in-simple-terms

The Halting Problem ask for the program H that:
If H(D,D)==1, D(D) will return.
Else If H(D,D)==0, D(D) will never return.
Else HP is undecidable