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

On 11/14/2024 2:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/14/24 3:28 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/14/2024 2:22 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

joes <noreply@example.org> wrote:
>

What are weasel words?

>
Words whose precise meaning is difficult/impossible to pin down, and
deliberately so.  Politicians use these all the time.
>

>
_DDD()
[00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d         pop ebp
[00002183] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>
DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its "ret"
instruction final halt state.
>
>
>

 But the emulation by HHH is NOT the DEFINITION of the behavior that HHH is suppoded to be reporting on.
 

Right and likewise ZFC is "supposed to include" sets that
are members of themselves. Thus according to your reasoning
ZFC is wrong because is directly disobeys the dogma of
naive set theory.

That behavior that HHH is supposed to be reporting on is the behavior of the actual direct exectution of the program described by the input,

IN OTHER WORDS YOU ARE SAYING THAT HHH SHOULD STUPIDLY IGNORE
THE FACT THAT DDD DOES SPECIFY THAT HHH MUST EMULATE ITSELF
EMULATING DDD
If you are not simply a liar then you are indoctrinated to
the same degree that people believe that Trump <is> the Christ.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer