Sujet : Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it ---
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 10. Aug 2024, 23:41:54
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v98qbj$ul50$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/10/2024 4:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/10/24 5:37 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/10/2024 4:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/10/24 5:18 PM, olcott wrote:
On 8/10/2024 3:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 8/10/24 4:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>
As I have countlessly proven it only requires enough correctly
emulated steps to correctly infer that the input would never
reach is "return" instruction halt state.
>
Except that HHH does't do that, since if HHH decides to abort and return, then the DDD that it is emulating WILL return, just after HHH has stopped its emulation.
>
You just confuse the behavior of DDD with the PARTIAL emulation that HHH does, because you lie about your false "tautology".
>
>
>
Denying a tautology seems to make you a liar. I only
say "seems to" because I know that I am fallible.
>
Claiming a false statement is a tautology only make you a liar.
>
In this case, you lie is that the HHH that you are talking about do the "correct emulation" you base you claim on.
>
That is just a deception like the devil uses, has just a hint of truth, but the core is a lie.
>
>
What I say is provably correct on the basis of the
semantics of the x86 language.
>
Nope.
>
The x86 language says DDD will Halt if HHH(DDD) returns a value.
>
HHH is called by main() there is no directly executed DDD()
any where in the whole computation.
>
Except in your requirements, and we can see what it does by adding a call to DDD from main, since nothing in your system calls main.
All that you need to know is that there is not any
directly executed DDD() anywhere in the computation.
Sorry, you don't get to say that DDD doesn't have directly executed behavior because you never called it.
You are just showing you utter ignorance of what you talk about.
What I said is perfectly true. Your weasel word intentional
misinterpretation of what I said is NOT what I actually said.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…