Sujet : Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 15. Jun 2024, 20:08:36
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <v4klb4$2219$12@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 6/15/24 1:39 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/15/2024 12:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/15/24 12:57 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/13/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/13/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>
It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of how H computes
the mapping from the x86 machine language finite string input to
H(D,D) using the finite string transformation rules specified by
the semantics of the x86 programming language that reaches the
behavior of the directly executed D(D)
>
>
Why? I don't claim it can.
>
When I ask you to provide the mapping from the input
to H(D,D) to each step of the behavior of D(D) and
and you refuse then within Socratic questioning you
have proved to not be interested in an honest dialog.
>
No, by asking a Red Herring question,
*In other words you DO NOT WANT AN HONEST DIALOGUE*
No, YOU do not what honest dialogs, as you ask me to try to prove something I don't claim to be do able, and I say why?
You either fail to understand that your attempt to answer that
question will increase your understanding or you already know
that the answer to that question proves that I am correct.
No, I KNOW the question to be a Red Herring, as it actually has NOTHING to do with the problem, you only think it does, and you want me top prove your false point.
*YOU* are showing that YOU are not interested in Honest Dialog, because you have been backed in to a corner.
You are the one that is backed into a corner here and no amount
of pure bluster will get you out. Failing to provide the requested
steps *is construed as your admission that I am correct*
What corner am I backed into?
The DEFINITION of a Halt Decider is that it answers about the behavior of the directly executed input, not about the partial simulation of it done by the decider.
YOU are the one stuck trying to claim that a wrong answer is right, and have been stuck there for years.
No one, but you, cases about what the simulation by H does, as it stops before it gets the answer. We have the correct answer, and it isn't the one H gives.
…