Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it ---

On 8/10/2024 1:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 8/10/24 2:11 PM, olcott wrote:

On 8/10/2024 12:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 8/10/24 1:37 PM, olcott wrote:

>
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
*The set of HHH x86 emulators are defined such that*
Each element of this set corresponds to one element of the set
of positive integers indicating the number of  x86 instructions
of DDD that it emulates.

>

*This is the mistake that I corrected*

But every one that emulates for a finite number of steps, and then returns create a halting DDD, so you claim is just disproven.

<snip>

>
When each element of the outer-most directly executed SHH
corresponds to one element of the set of positive integers
indicating the number of x86 instructions of DDD that it
emulates none of the emulated instances of HHH ever returns.

 And EVERY ONE Of them doesn't get the right answer.
 

*Yes it does seem to be your ADD*
We are not even talking about the right answer.
We are talking about your mistake that at least one
element of the emulated HHH returns.
*None of them ever returns no-matter-what*
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer