Re: HHH(DDD) computes the mapping from its input to HHH emulating itself emulating DDD --- anyone that says otherwise is a liar

On 11/20/2024 8:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/20/24 9:39 PM, olcott wrote:

>
What I say is proven true by the meaning of its words
and you lie about this condemning yourself to actual Hell.

 No, and you have shown you don't KNOW the meaning of the words, because you are using "Terms of Art" in an art that you are just ignorant of.
 

>
DDD emulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its "return"
instruction final halt state.

 Which is an invalid criteria for a decider, and even invalid for saying "never"
 

THAT IS NOT THE SAME AS SAYING IT IS FALSE.

Your HHH shows that the behavior of DDD doesn't YET reach the return instruction in the part of its behavior emulated by HHH, but it DOES reach their under the ACTUAL DEFINITION of the behavior of DDD, that HHH MUST ANSWER ABOUT, or your whole arguement is just based on lies.
 

>
That you say this is untrue is a despicable lie and
you know it.
>

 No, Because your statement is just NONSENSE.
 

No Jackass it is not nonsense. You may be a condemned
to actual Hell liar for saying that it is nonsense.
Here is actual nonsense: "f4(nmr rgfm59 mn98B"

That it is true and seems irrelevant to you would not
be a lie. You seem to prefer to lie.
>

 No, you are just proving you are nothing but a pathological  liar because you refuse to learn what you words mean.

That you call a point of view that is merely different
than the conventional point of view "nonsense" or a "lie"
IS A LIE THAT MAY GET YOU CONDEMNED TO ACTUAL HELL.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer