On 3/12/25 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/12/2025 5:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 3/12/25 11:37 AM, olcott wrote:
On 3/12/2025 4:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 12.mrt.2025 om 03:39 schreef olcott:
On 3/11/2025 9:37 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/11/2025 10:36 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/11/2025 9:32 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/11/2025 10:31 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/11/2025 9:18 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/11/2025 10:06 PM, olcott wrote:
On 3/11/2025 9:02 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/11/2025 9:41 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 12/03/2025 01:22, olcott wrote:
DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
own "return" instruction and terminates normally
in any finite or infinite number of correctly
simulated steps.
If it correctly simulates infinitely many steps, it doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>> terminate. Look up "infinite".
But your task is to decide for /any/ program, not just DDD. >>>>>>>>>>>>> That, as you are so fond of saying, is 'stipulated', and >>>>>>>>>>>>> you can't get out of it. The whole point of the
Entscheidungsproblem is its universality. Ignore that, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> you have nothing.
Given that his code has HHH(DD) returning 0,
THESE ARE THE WORDS ANYONE THAT DODGES THESE
WORDS WILL BE TAKEN FOR A LIAR
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
DDD correctly simulated by HHH never reaches its
own "return" instruction and terminates normally
in any finite or infinite number of correctly
simulated steps.
Changing the input is not allowed.
*You are simply lying that any input was ever changed*
You did precisely that when you hypothesize different code for HHH. >>>>>>>>
Changing the input is not allowed.
*THIS IS WHAT MY ORIGINAL WORDS MEANT*
HHH is the infinite set of every possible C function
that correctly emulates N steps of its input where
N any finite positive integer.
In other words, you're changing the input.
Changing the input is not allowed.
It is an infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs having the
property that DDD[0] ... DDD[N] never halts.
Proving that HHH[0] ... HHH[N} are unable to correctly complete the
simulation.
void Infinite_Loop()
{
HERE: goto HERE;
return;
}
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
Infinite_Recursion();
return;
}
In the exact same way that HHH cannot complete the
simulation of the above functions.
BECAUSE THEY SPECIFY NON-TERMINATING BEHAVIOR.
Right, so we can not use the correct simulation BY HHH as the
crireria, but it needs to be just the Correct Simulation, which will
be the same who-ever does it, so HHH doesn't need to actually do it,
Sorry, you are just showing how much your logic is based on FRAUD and
LIES.
You don't seem to understand that logic based on incorrect premises
can't prove anything.
By this same reasoning we could determine that the Liar Paradox
is TRUE because it claims to be ~(TRUE) and it <is> ~(TRUE).
So, you admit that you logic is bad?
Or, are you just showing that you don't understand a think that has been
talked about.
Since you have admitted that all your work is just a FRAUD, I guess we
don't need to answer you, as you clearly don't know what you are talking
about.
The fact that you admit that you began your logic by start with LIES
about what some of the words in the field mean, just shows that NOTHING
you say has meaning, because you really don't understand how logic works.
It isn't just the fields you are talking about, but the core concepts of
logic seem to be beyond your understanding and thus you just make up new definition because you don't understand the basic terms.
I could probably write a treatise on the complete set of logical
fallicies, and pull examples of every one of them from your work, where
you claimed based on that fallacy that something you said "must be
true", when all you did was prove you didn't know how to do logic.
Your "Correct Reasoning" is just an oxymoron as it isn't correct, and it doesn't actually use reasoning, but you push it because you are just a
regular moron.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)