Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.theory > #59607

Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally

From Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net>
Newsgroups comp.theory, sci.logic
Subject Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally
Date 2022-11-13 16:02 -0500
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <tkrm1b$1h0mj$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (25 earlier) <tkr33j$huv$1@gioia.aioe.org> <6FbcL.8759$ITE9.1469@fx40.iad> <tkrhnq$1cku$1@gioia.aioe.org> <eBccL.8760$ITE9.1742@fx40.iad> <tkrlcc$1hd6l$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 11/13/22 3:51 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/13/2022 2:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/13/22 2:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2022 1:34 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/22 10:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 11/13/2022 7:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/13/22 12:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 10:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/12/22 11:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 8:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/22 8:31 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 6:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/22 6:38 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 4:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/22 5:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 4:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/22 5:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/2022 3:25 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello.  My name is Ben and I am an Olcottaholic.  It's 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been 176 days
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since my last post.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stay strong, Richard.  ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I made the essence of my work simple enough that only 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expert knowledge of the C programming language is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required. H simulates its input using an x86 emulator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is an easily verified fact that Infinite_Loop 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly simulated by H would never reach its own last 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction and terminate normally after 1 to ∞ steps 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of correct simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> void E(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is an easily verified fact that E correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by H would never reach its own last 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instruction and terminate normally after 1 to ∞ steps 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of correct simulation. E remains stuck in recursive 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation until aborted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since E can NOT be correctly simulated by H, that is an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illogical statement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You must really have brain damage because you have been 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrected on the point many times. When H correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulates 1 to N steps of D, then one to N steps of D are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly simulated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When someone asks if I have any money then any amount of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> money > 0 counts. It is not a lie for me to say yes when 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have less than an infinite amount of money.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, how does a SINGLE H simulate this precise input for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from 1 to an infinte number of steps,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do we know that every element of the infinite set of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> positive integers > 5 is an element of the infinite set of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> integers > 3 ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Once H correctly matches an infinite behavior pattern after 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> N steps of correct simulation then H knows that D correctly 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulated by H will never reach its final state and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminate normally in N to to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because you can prove it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again you try to do proof by example, showing that you just 
>>>>>>>>>>>> don't understand what you are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe some day you will be enlightened into what you have 
>>>>>>>>>>>> been doing wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> H can't prove the behavor of the D it is simulating because 
>>>>>>>>>>>> it needs to take into account that H(D,D) WILL return if H 
>>>>>>>>>>>> takes the steps it needs 
>>>>>>>>>>> void E(void (*x)())
>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>    H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The simulated E never reaches its own final state whether or 
>>>>>>>>>>> not H ever aborts its simulation of E, thus E simulated by H 
>>>>>>>>>>> is by definition not halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You say "Whether or not" which means you do not have a 
>>>>>>>>>> deinition for H, because when you define H you need to define 
>>>>>>>>>> its behavior
>>>>>>>>> In the same way that we know that every integer > 5 is also > 3
>>>>>>>>> H correctly determines the halt status of D for every H/D pair 
>>>>>>>>> such that
>>>>>>>>> the H element of this H/D pair correctly simulates 1 to to ∞ 
>>>>>>>>> steps of D.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How does that apply?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> H needs a SPECIFIC sequence of instructions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> H: Begin Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:15d4d1
>>>>>>> Address_of_H:1383
>>>>>>> [00001993][0015d4bd][0015d4c1] 55         push ebp
>>>>>>> [00001994][0015d4bd][0015d4c1] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>> [00001996][0015d4b9][0014d48d] 51         push ecx
>>>>>>> [00001997][0015d4b9][0014d48d] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> [0000199a][0015d4b5][00001993] 50         push eax      // push P
>>>>>>> [0000199b][0015d4b5][00001993] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> [0000199e][0015d4b1][00001993] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>>>>>> [0000199f][0015d4ad][000019a4] e8dff9ffff call 00001383 // call H
>>>>>>> H: Infinitely Recursive Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You and I both can see that D correctly simulated by every H of 
>>>>>>> the set of H/E pairs will never reach its final state and 
>>>>>>> terminate normally.
>>>>>>> Why lie about this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope, we know you are stupid and a liar because the call H must 
>>>>>> eventually result in a return of 0 since this run just shopwed 
>>>>>> that H(P,P) returns 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have been told this many times and you ignore it.
>>>>>
>>>>> You told me that P simulated by H that never aborts its simulation 
>>>>> never stops running, thus from this we can correctly infer that no 
>>>>> P that has has had 1 to to ∞ steps correctly simulated by any H 
>>>>> ever reaches its own final state and terminates normally.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you use the strawman deception to lie?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, but this H DOES abort its simulation, so that doesn't matter.
>>>>
>>> In other words you are saying that infinite loops specify a sequence 
>>> of configurations that terminate normally after a finite number of 
>>> steps of correct simulation.
>>
>> Nope, but the fact that you think that is what I said shows that you 
>> don't understand the material.
>>
>>>
>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>> {
>>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> It is an easily verified fact that Infinite_Loop correctly simulated 
>>> by H would never reach its own last instruction and terminate 
>>> normally after 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation.
>>
>> No one denied that, so this is just more of your Red Herring.
>>
>>>
>>> void E(void (*x)())
>>> {
>>>    H(x, x);
>>> }
>>>
>>> It is an easily verified fact that E correctly simulated by H would 
>>> never reach its own last instruction and terminate normally after 1 
>>> to ∞ steps of correct simulation. E remains stuck in recursive 
>>> simulation until aborted.
>>
>> But that isn't the question, since the H you claim is correct doesn't 
>> correctly simulate the input since it aborts it.
>>
>> The H that this E is built on DOESN'T correctly simulate its input 
> 
> _E()
> [000019d2] 55             push ebp
> [000019d3] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
> [000019d5] 8b4508         mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [000019d8] 50             push eax
> [000019d9] 8b4d08         mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [000019dc] 51             push ecx
> [000019dd] e8b0f9ffff     call 00001392
> [000019e2] 83c408         add esp,+08
> [000019e5] 5d             pop ebp
> [000019e6] c3             ret
> Size in bytes:(0021) [000019e6]
> 
> H: Begin Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:112b28
> Address_of_H:1392
> [000019d2][00112b14][00112b18] 55         push ebp
> [000019d3][00112b14][00112b18] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000019d5][00112b14][00112b18] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [000019d8][00112b10][000019d2] 50         push eax         // push E
> [000019d9][00112b10][000019d2] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [000019dc][00112b0c][000019d2] 51         push ecx         // push E
> [000019dd][00112b08][000019e2] e8b0f9ffff call 00001392    // call H
> H: Infinitely Recursive Simulation Detected Simulation Stopped
> 
> Since I already proved that H does correctly simulate E in that every 
> line of the execution trace of E simulated by H exactly matches a 
> corresponding line that the x86 source-code of E specifies, why do you 
> lie about this?
> 
No, H does a correct PARTIAL simulation of its input.

When you mention that a correct simulation not reaching the end implies 
non-halting, that means it needs to be a COMPLETE siulation, so your 
statement is just a LIE.

You are being INTENTIONALLY deceptive with shifting definition.


> The first seven lines of E are proven to be correctly simulated by H and 
> also prove that E correctly simulated by every H that can possibly exist 
> would never reach its own final state and terminate normally.
> 
> 

And the "Simulation" of the "CALL" instruction is INCORRECT.

One error means NOT CORRECT.

So, YOU LIE.

This lie is also show to be INTENTIONAL.

You are just demonstrationg your utter STUPIDITY and IGNORANCE of the topic.

You are just proving that you are INCOMPETENT to talk about anything 
related to this,

Yoy have thus destroyed your reputation and totally wasted your last 18 
years of your life,

Sorry, you are a FAILURE.

YOU WILL BURN IN HELL by the scrptures you have quoted.

Back to comp.theory | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 09:28 -0600
  Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 10:57 -0500
    Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-11 18:36 +0000
      Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 13:43 -0500
        Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 13:16 -0600
          Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 14:30 -0500
            Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 13:39 -0600
              Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 16:07 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 15:15 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 16:44 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-11 21:54 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 16:44 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 18:25 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-11 23:55 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 17:59 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 19:24 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 18:46 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 21:15 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 20:35 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 21:45 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 20:48 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 21:56 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 22:00 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:02 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 08:43 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:06 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 15:12 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:52 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 10:20 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 11:47 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 22:17 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:08 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 08:55 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:02 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 14:09 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:32 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 14:41 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:52 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 15:03 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:26 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 15:38 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:59 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 10:06 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 11:21 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 09:50 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 11:26 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 11:00 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 12:59 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 12:16 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 13:24 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 18:42 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 14:00 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 19:26 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 13:37 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 14:54 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 12:45 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 13:57 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 13:04 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 14:21 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 13:36 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 15:01 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 14:07 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 15:26 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 14:35 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 16:28 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 15:59 -0600
                Olcottaholics anonymous Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-11-12 21:25 +0000
                E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 16:04 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 17:26 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 16:33 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 17:55 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 17:38 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 19:02 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 19:31 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 21:30 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 22:00 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 23:38 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-12 23:04 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 08:00 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-13 09:39 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 14:34 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-13 13:49 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 15:38 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 14:51 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2022-11-13 16:02 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 15:16 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 16:59 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 16:08 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-13 22:25 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 14:33 -0800
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 16:42 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 18:14 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 17:26 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-13 23:52 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-13 18:00 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 19:33 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 19:29 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-14 19:27 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-14 13:44 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-14 21:53 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-14 21:53 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-15 17:45 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-15 12:00 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-16 20:04 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-17 17:14 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-17 11:25 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 17:36 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 19:36 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 18:07 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-13 23:30 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 19:37 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl> - 2022-11-14 11:02 +0100
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2022-11-14 03:44 -0800
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-11-14 16:17 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-11-14 11:34 -0700
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-14 13:20 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-14 21:53 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-14 20:00 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-14 21:52 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 18:04 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 17:20 -0600
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-13 19:43 -0500
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-13 05:40 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-13 04:17 +0000
                Re: E correctly simulated by H would never reach its last instruction and terminate normally olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-13 12:35 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 18:19 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 13:33 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 09:51 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 14:50 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 16:37 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 18:20 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 17:39 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 18:48 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 18:05 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 19:29 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 18:51 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 21:25 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 20:36 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 21:51 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 20:57 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-11 22:25 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 21:36 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:11 -0500
        Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-11-11 12:56 -0700
          Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 14:19 -0600
          Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-11-11 18:43 -0700
            Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 21:06 -0600
          Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <none-ya@beez-waxes.com> - 2022-11-11 20:21 -0600
            Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-11 23:35 -0600
              Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:15 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 14:31 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 08:35 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 09:58 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 15:16 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:41 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 15:52 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 11:09 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-11-12 16:42 +0000
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 11:04 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 12:07 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 09:27 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 10:46 -0500
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-11-12 10:02 -0600
                Re: Simulating halt decider applied to a simpler input Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-11-12 11:14 -0500

csiph-web