Re: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?

On 7/16/24 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/16/2024 3:16 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-15 13:51:14 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 7/15/2024 3:37 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-15 03:41:24 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 7/14/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/14/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:

>
Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination
of simulating termination analyzer HHH necessarily specifies
non-halting behavior or it would never need to be aborted.

>
Excpet, as I have shown, it doesn't.
>
Your problem is you keep on ILEGALLY changing the input in your argument because you have misdefined what the input is.
>
The input to HHH is ALL of the memory that it would be accessed in a correct simulation of DDD, which includes all the codd of HHH, and thus, if you change HHH you get a different input.
>
If you want to try to claim the input is just the bytes of the function DDD proper then you are just admitting that you are nothing more than a lying idiot that doesn't understand the problem,

Turing machines only operate on finite strings they do
not operate on other Turing machines *dumbo*

>
That's right. But the finite string can be a description of a Turing machine.

>
No that is wrong. The finite string must encode a Turing machine.

>
That you agree does not mean that it is wrong.
>

 Your ignorance that a Turing machine cannot take its own
executing self as an input is no rebuttal what-so-ever.
 

And your ignorance (or intentional lying) about the fact that it CAN take a representation of its self, and thus need to answer about itself show that your "rebutal" isn't a rebutal at all, but just more of your ignorant pathological lying.