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

On 11/16/24 1:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/16/2024 12:31 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 16 Nov 2024 11:18:33 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 11/16/2024 10:51 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 16 Nov 2024 09:17:21 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 11/16/2024 8:26 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/16/24 9:09 AM, olcott wrote:

On 11/16/2024 6:36 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/15/24 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/15/2024 10:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/15/24 10:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/15/2024 9:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/15/24 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/15/2024 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/15/24 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/14/2024 8:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/14/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:

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:

>

Which HHH does DDD call, the one that aborts?

This has never made any damn difference.

It absolutely does. If the inner HHH aborts, the outer doesn't need to,
because DDD halts.
>

That I have to keep telling you this seems to indicate that you are a
liar.

You don't need to. I am talking about the inner H called by D, not the
outermost H simulating D.
>

 OK I GIVE UP YOU ARE JUST A DAMNED LIAR
YOU PROVED THAT BB ERASING RATHER THAN
RESPONDING TO MY MOST RELEVANT CONTEXT

So, you agree that YOUR erasing of context from my replies just makes you a DAMNED LIAR

 The fact remains that DDD emulated by any HHH cannot
possibly reach its own "return" instruction final halt
state no matter WTF else IS THE CORRECT BASIS.

No, the CORRECT BASIS is the basis DEFINED for the Halting Problem, and that is the results of the unbounded emulation of the input by an actually correct emulator, not necessarily the decider.
It doesn't matter WTF you want to beleive, that is just the facts.

 When an emulator emulates an infinite loop we do not
count this emulated infinite loop as halting when we
yank the power cord out.

But, since Computations are mathematical entities, they don't need "power" to run, so all you do by pulling the cord is loose the knowledge of that the compuation actually does.
You are just again proving you don't understand what you are talking about.

 HALTING IS ONLY REACHING A FINAL HALT STATE.
That I have to keep telling you this seems to
indicate that you are a liar.

Right, and not-halting is only NEVER reaching a final state even after an unbounded number of steps, and thus an aborted emulation doesn't show it.

 *NOW YOU HAVE PROVED IT*
 

Right, you are just adding to the proof that you are nothing but a pathetic ignorant pathological lying idiot that doesn't know what he is talking about, and just doesn't care.
Sorry, that IS the facts, and you are just sealing your reputation as that liar.