Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---Breakthrough ?

On 11/9/24 6:43 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/9/2024 2:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/9/24 3:01 PM, olcott wrote:

 On 11/3/2024 12:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > On 11/3/24 9:39 AM, olcott wrote:
 >>
 >> The finite string input to HHH specifies that HHH
 >> MUST EMULATE ITSELF emulating DDD.
 >
 > Right, and it must CORRECTLY determine what an unbounded
 > emulation of that input would do, even if its own programming
 > only lets it emulate a part of that.
 >
 

>
I am saying that HHH does need to do the infinite emulation itself, but

>
Right and it doesn't.

>
But doesn't give the required answer, which is based on something doing it.
>

 The unaborted emulation of DDD by HHH DOES NOT HALT.
*Maybe I have to dumb it down some more*

But that isn't the HHH that you are talking about.
It seems, you don't understand that in a given evaluation, HHH and DDD are FIXED PROGRAM.

 HHH predicts what would happen if no HHH ever aborted
its emulation of DDD. This specific DDD never halts
even if it stops running due to out-of-memory error.
 

In other words, it tries to predict what some OTHER version of the program DDD would do if it was based on some OTHER version of HHH, instead of the job it is supposed to do of predicting what THIS version of DDD does which is built on THIS version of HHH.
Since its input is THIS DDD, that is what it must answer about, not some other non-input.
Or, in simpler terms, you just the f- don't understand what a PROGRAM is.
Sorry, you are just proving you are an idiot.