Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Op 08.jul.2025 om 21:49 schreef olcott:It need not be a full program.On 7/8/2025 2:01 PM, Mike Terry wrote:Again changing the meaning of the words. Here 'capacity' seems to mean the ability to ignore the facts.On 08/07/2025 17:07, joes wrote:>Am Tue, 08 Jul 2025 10:08:05 -0500 schrieb olcott:>On 7/8/2025 6:13 AM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 7/7/25 10:38 PM, olcott wrote:On 7/7/2025 9:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 7/7/25 7:52 PM, olcott wrote:On 7/7/2025 5:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 7/7/25 2:38 PM, olcott wrote:On 7/7/2025 2:36 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Op 07.jul.2025 om 05:12 schreef olcott:On 7/6/2025 9:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 7/6/25 4:06 PM, olcott wrote:On 7/6/2025 12:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Ah, but your HHH does report on a *hypothetical* input that wouldn'tNo decider is ever allowed to report on anything besides theIt seems you don't understand those words.And there is no way for HHH to correctly simulate its inputYou insistence that a non-terminating input be simulated until
and return an answer
>
non-existent completion is especially nuts because you have
been told about this dozens of times.
What the F is wrong with you?
>
I don't say that the decider needs to simulate the input to
completion, but that it needs to be able to actually PROVE that
if this exact input WAS given to a correct simultor (which
won't be itself, since it isn't doing the complete simulation)
will run for an unbounded number of steps.
>
actual behavior that its input actually specifies.
call the aborting simulator HHH, but instead a *different* (possibly
similar) simulator that would *not* abort.
>Wow. Can't you just answer the question? Also, "we" and "proved"? Not>Really, so how does that code NOT aboft its simulation of DDD?"No, that code proves that HHH, as defined,How is it "Counter-Factual"?That is counter-factual and you would know this if you had good C++No, that code proves that HHH, as defined, always aborts itsAnd HHH does not do that. The input specifies a halting program,>
because it includes the abort code. But HHH gives up before it
reaches that part of the specification and the final halt state.
I have corrected you on this too many times.
You have sufficiently proven that you are dishonest or
incompetent.
*This code proves that you are wrong*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c That you
are too F-ing stupid to see this is less than no rebuttal at all.
>
simulation of DDD and returns 0,
skills.
>
It is YOU that is just counter-factual.
>
always aborts its simulation of DDD"
That is a false statement. If you understood the code you would know
your error.
>
You have a reading comprehension problem.
When critique words you are strictly not allowed to change even a single
word without being dishonest.
"No, that code proves that HHH as defined
always aborts its simulation of DDD"
If you can't figure how how that is false we have conclusively proved
your lack of sufficient technical competence.
being understood isn't very convincing. So how does HHH not abort?
This is one of PO's practiced tactics - he makes a claim, and regardless of how patently false that claim appears, he refuses to logically defend the claim beyond saying "the claim is true, and if you understood xxx you would realise it is true".
>
All of my claims are easily verified facts to those
with the capacity to verify them.>This is not the full program.
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
>
_DDD()
[00002192] 55 push ebp
[00002193] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192 // push DDD
[0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 // call HHH
[0000219f] 83c404 add esp,+04
[000021a2] 5d pop ebp
[000021a3] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>
It refers in the call instruction to address 000015d2, which is not shown here.*It is shown here*
From other sources, such as Halt7.c, we know that this is the code for a HHH that aborts and returns a value 0.It is impossible for any HHH to return any value
When we use that fact, we see that a correct simulation wouldThe stupid mistake that everyone here makes is thinking
continue at 0000219f, using this value and reaching the final halt state.--
Of course, HHH fails to do this correct simulation, as you have shown many times.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.