XPost: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/26/2025 12:35 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   > On 2025-11-26, olcott  wrote:   
   >> In other words you are trying to get away with   
   >> disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language   
   >> or the semantics of the C programing language.   
   >   
   > Says the pitiful twit who has no meaningful response to results shown   
   > with code.   
   >   
      
   I am not the one that came up with the jackass idea   
   of restarting a simulation after it has already   
   conclusively proved that it cannot possibly halt.   
      
   news://news.eternal-september.org/20251104183329.967@kylheku.com   
   On 11/4/2025 8:43 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
    > On 2025-11-05, olcott  wrote:   
    >>   
    >> The whole point is that D simulated by H   
    >> cannot possbly reach its own simulated   
    >> "return" statement no matter what H does.   
    >   
    > Yes; this doesn't happen while H is running.   
    >   
    > So while H does /something/, no matter what H does,   
    > that D simulation won't reach the return statement.   
    >   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make   
   "true on the basis of meaning" computable.   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation   
   for correct reasoning.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)