Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1

On 4/2/25 9:24 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/2/2025 9:11 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 31 Mar 2025 17:11:05 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 3/31/2025 3:33 PM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:13:04 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 3/31/2025 3:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

>

But we all agree that HHH fails to reach the end of the simulation of
this finite recursion. An end that exists as proven by direct
execution and world class simulators. Why repeating this agreement as
if someone denies it?

Because DDD calls HHH(DDD) in recursive emulation DDD EMULATED BY HHH
CANNOT POSSIIBLY HALT.

That is the failure.

Non-halting is always construed as the failure of the input.

 

What the fuck. A halt *decider* is supposed to halt, even on non-halting
inputs.
>

 HHH(DDD) has halted since its original version H(P)
several years ago. DDD emulated by HHH could not
possibly halt since its original version P emulated
by H several years ago.

And thus the HHH that DDD calls always returns to it when properly emulated.

 On 10/14/2022 7:44 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
 > ... PO really /has/ an H (it's
 > trivial to do for this one case) that
 > correctly determines that P(P)
 > *would* never stop running *unless* aborted.
 

WHich, as Ben has pointed out, your making this quote it just proof that you are just a blantant liar, as you are taking it out of context.
He is pointing out that in Olcott-Computations Theory with Olcott-Programs and Olcott-Halting, none of which match the actual normal theory, you have defined a system that P(P) will not halt running unless aborted as Olcott-programs don't need to include the code they use.
THe problem is that Olcott-Machines don't form a Turing-Complete computation system (or possibly even a usable computation system for anything practical) so the halting problem you claim to talk about doesn't even apply to it.
Sorry, you are still just proving you are nothing but a ignorant and stupid pathological liar that doesn't care about what is actually true, or even know what that means.