Re: HHH(DDD)==0 is correct

On 7/11/2025 3:15 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-10 14:15:31 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 7/10/2025 4:09 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-07-09 12:45:54 +0000, olcott said:
>

>
*Here is HHH matching that pattern*
executed HHH simulates DDD that calls emulated HHH(DDD)
that simulates DDD that calls emulated emulated HHH(DDD)
>
*Here is the 197 page full execution trace of that*
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf

>
That trace is a little long. Where in that trace is the forth level of
recursive simulation statrted?
>

After the non-terminating behavior pattern is matched
on line 996
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
HHH rejects DDD as specifying non-halting behavior.

 This is a good example of what I meant in another comment when
I said that you don't answer questions.
 

When you ask an incorrect question, like you did I provide
an answer to the corrected question.
(1) HHH(DDD) is executed
(2) HHH emulates DDD
(3) Emulated DDD calls an emulated HHH(DDD)
(4) Emulated HHH emulates DDD
(5) this DDD calls HHH(DDD) again
We can know that HHH does emulate itself emulating
DDD because the first instruction of HHH [00001606]
is reached once when invoked in main() (page 38)
and again (page 47) after DDD emulated by HHH calls
HHH(DDD) [000021de] (page 45). This emulated DDD
calls HHH(DDD) On page 187.
DDD emulated by HHH has now met its non halting
behavior pattern on line 996:
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer