Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar

On 11/21/24 10:19 AM, olcott wrote:

On 11/20/2024 10:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/20/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/20/2024 5:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/20/24 5:03 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/20/2024 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-11-20 03:23:12 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 11/19/2024 4:12 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-11-18 20:42:02 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 11/18/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:

The "the mapping" on the subject line is not correct. The subject line
does not specify which mapping and there is no larger context that could
specify that. Therefore it should be "a mapping".
>
On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott said:
>

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
_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 encoding of HHH that emulates N
to infinity number of steps of DDD cannot possibly
reach its "return" instruction final halt state.

>
Because it cannot reach the instructions before tha return.
Because it cannot reach the instruction after the HHH call.
Because it cannot reach return instruction of HHH.
>

This applies to every DDD emulated by any HHH no
matter the recursive depth of emulation. Thus it is
a verified fact that the input to HHH never halts.

>
That is too vague to be regareded true or false. It is perfectly possibe
to define two programs and call them DDD and HHH

>
What a jackass. DDD and HHH have been fully specified
for many months.

>
They are specified in a way that makes your "every DDD" and "any DDD"
bad (perhaps even incorrect) use of Common language.
>

>
I specify the infinite sets with each element numbered
on the top of page 2 of my paper. Back in April of 2023
>
https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D

>
You have also specifed that HHH is the program in your GitHub repository.
>

>
Should I assume that you must be lying about
this because you did not quote where I did this?

>
You forget how many times you have posted the link to your "fully functioning code"?
>
You can't have it both ways, either that *IS* the code of HHH.
>

>
My code is one example of the infinite set of every possible
HHH that emulates DDD according to the semantics of the x86
language.

>
But it gets the wrong answer for the halting problem, as DDD dpes halt.
>

 DDD emulated by HHH does not halt. You lie about this
and condemn yourself to actual Hell. Are you a fake Christian?
 

DDD emulated by HHH does not have a property that is like "halting".
Halting is a semantic property of the "input".
You have made it clear that your "Input" is the code of the non-leaf function DDD, whose behavior is NOT just a function of itself, but of other things, and without those other things specified, you have no semantic property to even talk about,.
Your question is like the height of the color green.
I do not lie, but then you have shown that you don't actually understand the meaning of what Truth actually is. You might be able to quote words that define it, but you don't actually know what those means, as you are unable to actually apply them.
Sorry, but YOU are the one that has punched yourself a one-way ticket to Gehanna, and unless you repent soon, you may find your eternity is spent working out the behavior of your infinite set of inputs.