On 5/3/2024 9:08 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2024 4:43 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-02 14:43:45 +0000, olcott said:
[ .... ]
This is not computer science it is only software engineering.
Therefore not convincing.
We must have agreement on verified facts before proceeding
otherwise people leap to the conclusion that I must be wrong
on the basis of not paying attention to what I am saying.
They say you are wrong on the basis of their superior education and
knowledge, as well as by reading what you write.
I have found that it is actually merely pure bluster.
When reasoning is provided it is nonsense.
Richard "interpreted"
---D(D) simulated by H--- as ---D(D) NEVER simulated by H---
You calling your (a)
sentence "a verified fact" is you lying.
The fact that no one but Richard ever tried to provide
a counter-example showing that this is false
(a) It is a verified fact that for every possible H/D pair where
1 to N steps of D(D) are simulated by H that this simulated D(D)
cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
*Is evidence that no counter-example exists*
That you keep saying that I am wrong without providing any
counter-example is the pure bluster that my new system
of dialogue uncovers.
You know full well that it is
at best controversial, and likely highly problematic. If you were to
define things fully, and talk in non-vague language, something like your
(a) might come to be regarded as a fact. We're some distance away from
that happening.
*Tell me what you think is missing from this*
*Tell me what you think is missing from this*
*Tell me what you think is missing from this*
00 int H(ptr x, ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
We are examining the behavior of D(D) for every possible H/D
pair where 1 to N steps of D(D) are simulated by H.
*Execution Trace*
Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
*keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
Line 01
Line 02
Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
*Simulation invariant*
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
(a) It is a verified fact that for every possible H/D pair where
1 to N steps of D(D) are simulated by H that this simulated D(D)
cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
(b) Rebuttals must show a counter example where 1 to N steps
of D(D) are simulated by H and the simulated D(D) reaches past
its own line 03.
There is no judgment call here it is all empirical fact.
Empirical facts are not proofs. That someting sometimes happened
some way does not generalize to other more or less similar things
at other times.
If you are telling the truth that D(D) simulated by H
is ambiguous to you then you have insufficient skill at C.
It is so vague as to be meaningless. To give a rough outline of what you
are trying to do would take at least a paragraph.
Without further elaboration I have no basis to take this
as anything other than a falsehood.
Talking about C skills, the following lines of C that you have been
spamming this newsgroup with are syntactically incorrect. This was
pointed out to you several months ago, and you have not fixed the problem
since. That suggests you have never tried to compile them, and thus
never run the "program" it's supposed to be a fragment of. It also
suggests a lack of attention to detail, something essential to being a
skilled programmer.
What do you think is syntactically incorrect about them?
int main()
{
H(D,D);
return 0;
}
Can D correctly simulated by H terminate normally?
00 int H(ptr x, ptr x) // ptr is pointer to int function
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03 int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04 if (Halt_Status)
05 HERE: goto HERE;
06 return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11 H(D,D);
12 }
And, note, you ARE spamming the newsgroup. Anybody who wants to read
your invalid C code has already done so, likely many times. You don't
need to keep posting it time after time after time. Doing so could
conceivably lead to your being banned from posting.
I am requiring everyone that ever said that I am wrong
to put up or shut up.
When I challenge them to show where and how I am wrong
and they have nothing, then everyone will see that these
rebuttals were never more than pure bluster.
I have solved the last computer science based objection
yet will not present that until after people prove that
their review of my work is an honest review on the basis
that they agree to the verified facts of the software
engineering of my work.
That they will not even agree to verified facts proves
that their side of the dialogue is dishonest and it does
so in a way that everyone can see.
[ .... ]
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…