Re: key error in all the proofs --- fakers or liars?

Am Mon, 12 Aug 2024 17:46:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 8/12/2024 5:31 PM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 12 Aug 2024 16:23:30 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 8/12/2024 4:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 8/12/24 2:25 PM, olcott wrote:

On 8/12/2024 1:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 8/12/24 1:32 PM, olcott wrote:

On 8/12/2024 12:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

One thing I do note is that the trace sees conditional jump
instructions in the trace, but your "rule" is that there can be no
conditional instructions see in the full loop, so something is wrong.
Page 79, simulated the JNZ 00001335 at address 000012f8 Why wasn't
this counted as a conditional instruction in the trace? (That means
the recursion isn't unconditional)
So, mybe it is a correct partial emulation, but just ignores some of
the meaning, so that conditional recursion is incorrectly considered
to be infinite recursion. Perhaps you just failed to test you code to
see that it correctly detects conditional jump instructions.

How is that branch simulated?

Note, examining your code, your code also VIOLATES your requirement
to be a pure functikon.
First, in Init_Halts_HH you detect if you are the "root" decider by
look to see it the stack is at the initial prefilled value, and if so
make yourself the "root" and setup a trace buffer, and record that we
are the "Root"
Then in Decides_Halting_HH you test that Root flag, and only the
"Root"
decider actually does halt deciding, thus the copy of HHH that DDD
calls performs a DIFFERENT set of actions to the ones that the one
called by main does.
Thus, You are proven to be a liar that you code ACTUALLY acts as a
pure function. The static memory isn't just a way for the lower
emulator to have its results seen by the higher emulator, but the
emulators actually change from Halt Deciders to pure emulators when
they are nes

This is where I lose track. HHH is not simulating itself.

It changes behaviour based on a global variable.

that it doesn't simulate what happens in HHH after the jmp 000015e7
instruction, and thus you claim is still a LIE.

That is counter factual.

Maybe it is recording but not looking at those instructions. Why else
is it ignoring the conditional instructions?

I proved that your statements were counter-factual.

Above I see only your claim. What is simulated after that jump?

Still open.

I finally found a group of tens of thousands of people that totally
understand what I am saying.

--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.