Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD)

On 5/9/2025 3:39 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.mei.2025 om 01:53 schreef olcott:

On 5/8/2025 6:45 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:

You are using C, a language in which you appear to have little
apparent expertise or willingness to learn, to demonstrate claims
that, if true, would overturn ideas that have been generally accepted
for decades.  Can you understand why I might decide that analyzing
your claims is not worth my time?
>

I learned C back when K & R was the standard.
We don't need to look at any of my code for me to totally prove my
point. For example when the above DDD is correctly simulated by HHH
this simulated DDD cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction.
>

A vacuous statement, because HHH cannot correctly simulate DDD, which
includes HHH itself.
A vacuous statement does not prove anything.

 
You are saying that the smartest genius (not me)
in the universe cannot possibly create an HHH that simulates itself
simulating DDD?
What is the evidence for this wild-eyed claim?