Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Totally ignoring invalid rebuttals

On 3/7/25 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/7/2025 2:22 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-03-06 20:09:24 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 3/6/2025 1:49 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-03-04 14:17:56 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 3/4/2025 3:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 04.mrt.2025 om 04:07 schreef olcott:

int DD() { int Halt_Status = HHH(DD); if (Halt_Status) HERE:
goto HERE; return Halt_Status; }
>
_DD() [00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping [00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping [00002136]
51         push ecx      ; make space for local [00002137]
6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD [0000213c] e882f4ffff call
000015c3 ; call HHH(DD) [00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04 [00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax [00002147] 837dfc00
cmp dword [ebp-04],+00 [0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f [0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d [0000214f] 8b45fc     mov
eax,[ebp-04] [00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp [00002154]
5d         pop ebp [00002155] c3         ret Size in bytes:
(0035) [00002155]
>
DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
"ret" instruction and terminate normally.

I wonder why Olcott keeps repeating that HHH fails to reach the
'ret' instruction, where the direct execution or world-class
simulators have no problem to reach the 'ret' instruction of
exactly the same finite string as input.

>
The only valid rebuttal is to show all of the steps of exactly how
DD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its own "ret" instruction.

>
Not true. A sufficient rebuttal is anything that makes a reader to
notice that you have not proven one (or more) of your claims.
>

>
A specific rebuttal of this specific claim

DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
"ret" instruction and terminate normally.

Requires a specific rebuttal of that claim

>
The claim is vacuous as DD correctly emulated by HHH does not exist.

 The code proves otherwise by providing the correct execution
trace of DD that no one has been able to show any mistake.
 https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
 

You mean the code that shows the correct that can be done by your UTM when main calls DD() and shows that DD returns, and that HHH sees the same initial trace until it ONCORRECTLY decides to abort.
Sorry, you are just proving you don't know what you are talking about.
But then, you admitted that everything you say is just a fraud, as you are using changed fundamental definitions of terms-of-art in the system.
And, as been shown, neighter DD or HHH as you have presented them actually qualify as the required class of programs for the theory,
Sorry, you blew you chances by not understanding the fundamental rules of logic, and the importance of using the right definitions.