XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic
From: polcott333@gmail.com
On 8/4/2025 6:12 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/4/25 10:54 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/4/2025 9:38 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>>
>>> In comp.theory Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>
>>> [ .... ]
>>>
>>>> Again, irrelevant examples.
>>>> The input for HHH is more like:
>>>
>>>> void Finite_Recursion () {
>>>> static int N = 5;
>>>> if (N > 0) Finite_Recursion ();
>>>> printf ("Olcott thinks this is never printed.\n");
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Careful! I think you meant "if (N-- > 0) ...." :-)
>>>
>>> The fact that PO missed this shows how little attention he pays to
>>> detail.
>>>
>>> [ .... ]
>>>
>>
>>
>> The above function has nothing to do with what I am
>> claiming it is merely dodging the actual point.
>>
>> I call out any attempt at twisting the words that I
>> actually said for the purpose of the strawman deception.
>>
>> _DDD()
>> [00002192] 55 push ebp
>> [00002193] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>> [00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192 // push DDD
>> [0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 // call HHH
>> [0000219f] 83c404 add esp,+04
>> [000021a2] 5d pop ebp
>> [000021a3] c3 ret
>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>>
>> Each element of the infinite set of HHH/DDD pairs
>> that emulates a natural number N number of instructions
>> of DDD never reaches past machine address [0000219a].
>>
>> This is the same template as the Linz proof where
>> Ĥ.embedded_H is every Linz H that can possibly exist.
>
> But Linz doesn't give the TEMPLATE to the decider, but the program built
> by it, and THAT includes the HHH that it was built on, and thus every
> instance is different, so your claim about the infinite set is
> worthless,
In other words you are saying the Linz only proved
that one particular instance of his own H gets the
wrong answer for its input.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
