Re: HHH(DD) --- COMPUTE ACTUAL MAPPING FROM INPUT TO OUTPUT

On 16/04/2025 01:47, Richard Damon wrote:

The problem with your argument is that partial simulation does not define behavior, so the simulation by HHH doesn't actually say what the final behavior of DD is, and when you talk about DD correct simulated by HHH, that is just a LIE, as this HHH doesn't do that, and to talk about a DIFFERENT program HHH, is just invoking the fallacy of equivocation, because you do it in a way that CHANGES the input, since to be a program in the first place, it includes the code of the one HHH that it was defined to be "pathological" to.
 So, by doing so you just prove that you are nothing but a pathological liar.

Not necessarily. Hanlon's Razor applies. I think he's just proving that he has misunderstood the problem. His arguments lean not towards analysis but towards defending the time he has invested in the bizarre approach he has taken. Think fingers in ears.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within