Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts?

On 6/22/24 7:59 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/22/2024 3:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/22/24 3:49 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/22/2024 2:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/22/24 3:35 PM, olcott wrote:

>
The correct measure of the behavior of the actual input is DDD
correctly simulated by H0 according to the definition of the
semantics of the x86 programming language.

>
FROM WHERE?
>
That is just YOUR LIE!!!!!
>

>
Now you are trying to get away with disbelieving in the
semantics of the x86 language and you can't even spell "from"
>
That you have the audacity to call me a liar over this
might condemn you to Hell (I sincerely hope not).
>

>
I call it a lie, because it IS one.
>
You claim a definition of the "Correct Answer" that has NO source but your own ignorant mind. That makes it a LIE, as there is a DIFFERENT definition that you refuse to use.
>
You claim you can show "behavior" by the definition of the x86 assembly language that is not there.
>

 Liar
 

You losing it Peter.
you need to show something, or you are just admitting you have lost.
You HAVE lost, since you have nothing to back your lies, and that has been reveiled, but not even trying is just giving up.
The ACTUAL CORRECT emulation of the proper input (which includes the code of the decide which is needed) shows that DDD will Halt since H0 will decide on it and return, and thus DDD will halt.
H0's emulation might not get there, but that isn't the question, and H1's emulation, which will be identical to H0 up to the point H0 stops (if H0 did a correct emulation per your rules) so there is no ground to say the behavior was different.
H0 is just WRONG about halting.