Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals ---PSR---

On 3/5/2025 6:19 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/5/25 12:09 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/4/2025 11:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/4/25 11:48 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/4/2025 10:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/4/25 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/4/2025 5:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/4/25 11:11 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/4/2025 9:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 04.mrt.2025 om 15:17 schreef olcott:

On 3/4/2025 3:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 04.mrt.2025 om 04:07 schreef olcott:

int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
>
_DD()
[00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002136] 51         push ecx      ; make space for local
[00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD
[0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD)
[00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax
[00002147] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
[0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f
[0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d
[0000214f] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04]
[00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp
[00002154] 5d         pop ebp
[00002155] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155]
>
DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.

I wonder why Olcott keeps repeating that HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction, where the direct execution or world- class simulators have no problem to reach the 'ret' instruction of exactly the same finite string as input.

>
The only valid rebuttal is to show all of the steps of
exactly how DD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its
own "ret" instruction.
>

And that is exactly what Olcott does not show.

>
Likewise I never attempt to show exactly how
all squares are round.
>

So, my claim remains: HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction, where the direct execution and some world-class simulators have no problem to reach it.

>
DD calls its own emulator when emulated by HHH.
DD DOES NOT call its own emulator when emulated by HHH1.
DD DOES NOT call its own emulator when directly executed.

>
Which just show your stupidity, as DD doesn't HAVE its own emulator, and CAN'T know who or if it is being emulated.
>

>
It is not my stupidity it is your dishonestly using
the straw-man deception to change the subject away from:
>
DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.
>
>

>
WHich is the strawman, that you are too stupid to recogines.
>

>
I will show that it is not straw-man after you quit
dodging that point.
>

>
Wrong order,

>
I WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY OTHER ORDER
>

  In other words, you CAN'T handle any other order, even though logically requried, because you need to hide your fraud.
 

My proof requires a specific  prerequisite order.
One cannot learn algebra before one has learned to count to ten.
DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "ret" instruction and terminate normally.
Is the first step of the mandatory prerequisite order of my proof
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer