Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct

On 7/4/2025 12:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/4/25 9:32 AM, olcott wrote:

On 7/4/2025 8:22 AM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 04 Jul 2025 07:50:23 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/4/2025 2:35 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-03 12:56:42 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/3/2025 3:57 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-03 02:50:40 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/1/2025 11:37 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:12:48 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/30/25 2:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

>

No. A simulator does not have to run a simulation to completion if
it can determine that the input, A PROGRAM, never halts.

>

If. But here it confuses that with not being able to simulate past the
recursive call.
>

>
It is the correct simulation of the input that
specifies the actual behavior of this input.

 Right, and that means correctly simulating EVERY instruction that makes up the PROGRAM, which must include the code of *THE* HHH, or you can't "correctly simulate" the call instruction.
 SIn
 

>
If this simulation cannot simulate past the recursive
call then this correctly simulated input cannot possibly
reach its own correctly simulated final halt state.
>

 But it can, as the call goes into HHH, and you then just simulate the code of HHH.
 

Do you mean like this? (as I have been telling you for three years)
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
I ignore the rest of your points because you
prove that it is almost impossible for you
to handle a single point.
When I go over the exact same point 500 times
you never notice that I ever mentioned this point.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer