Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: D correctly simulated by pure function H cannot possibly reach
 its, own line 06 --- Dishonest?
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 21:40:50 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 125
Message-ID: <v2u7fj$38fjo$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v2nsvh$1rd65$2@dont-email.me> <v2qvar$1vblp$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v2r1dn$2ge4f$4@dont-email.me> <v2r3r0$2h2l7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2r7cq$1vblq$10@i2pn2.org> <v2rpda$2nvot$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2smub$22aq1$1@i2pn2.org> <v2t8o0$2vna0$3@dont-email.me>
 <v2t9tj$22aq1$5@i2pn2.org> <v2tajd$2vna0$6@dont-email.me>
 <v2tdre$22aq1$7@i2pn2.org> <v2tfms$30u1r$3@dont-email.me>
 <v2tgv2$22aq0$2@i2pn2.org> <v2th6a$319s1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tjpr$22aq1$9@i2pn2.org> <v2tk9i$31qgp$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tkit$22aq0$6@i2pn2.org> <v2tl8b$31uo4$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tm5d$22aq0$7@i2pn2.org> <v2tnr1$32e7p$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tp5n$22aq0$9@i2pn2.org> <v2tpdg$32me8$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tptp$22aq1$13@i2pn2.org> <v2tq50$32r0d$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2tqh7$22aq1$15@i2pn2.org> <v2tr68$32uto$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2trch$23vgp$1@i2pn2.org> <v2trts$331vq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2tsub$23vgp$2@i2pn2.org> <v2u0o5$33mgp$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2u2uf$23vgp$4@i2pn2.org> <v2u5a0$349br$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2u6if$23vgo$3@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 04:40:54 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b67ec24a85de95a55e6b4d0cc81926c3";
	logging-data="3423864"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+DaGCYttQrO+XecZciS3XC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:j9FuzNp+3ctM7J4nGm5ZvsSPxm4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v2u6if$23vgo$3@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 6855

On 5/25/2024 9:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/25/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/25/2024 8:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/25/24 8:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/25/2024 6:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/25/24 7:23 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/25/2024 6:14 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/25/24 7:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/25/2024 5:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/25/24 6:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A 
>>>>>>>>>> BASIS*
>>>>>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A 
>>>>>>>>>> BASIS*
>>>>>>>>>> *We can get to that ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE ABOVE SUBJECT AS A 
>>>>>>>>>> BASIS*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No we need to handle them to know what you have defined.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After all, if we don't agree on the inmplications, we don't 
>>>>>>>>> have agreement on what is being stipuated as the defintions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>>>>>> *Thus trolling me is made impotent*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They are not "Baseless" but based on the actual definitions of 
>>>>>>>>> the terms that you are changing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is 
>>>>>>>> false*
>>>>>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is 
>>>>>>>> false*
>>>>>>>> *In other words you can show in a convincing way that this is 
>>>>>>>> false*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Didn't say that, which shows you to be a liar, or at least being 
>>>>>>> deceptive, which is why we need to handle the implications first
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Note, you are just proving that you don't understand how logic 
>>>>>>> works)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The implications of your specifications are:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) That your H is NOT a computation equivalent for a Turing machine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OFF TOPIC UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THE BASIS OF THE SUBJECT LINE OF 
>>>>>> THIS POST
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, necessary condition to talk, about the subject line.
>>>>>
>>>> I CAN PROVE MY POINT IN FIVE STEPS YOU CANNOT SKIP STEP ONE
>>>> STEP TWO DEPENDS ON STEP ONE, LIKEWISE DOWN TO STEP FIVE.
>>>>
>>>> I CAN PROVE MY POINT IN FIVE STEPS YOU CANNOT SKIP STEP ONE
>>>> STEP TWO DEPENDS ON STEP ONE, LIKEWISE DOWN TO STEP FIVE.
>>>>
>>>> I CAN PROVE MY POINT IN FIVE STEPS YOU CANNOT SKIP STEP ONE
>>>> STEP TWO DEPENDS ON STEP ONE, LIKEWISE DOWN TO STEP FIVE.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Then DO so, you will need to do it without agreement on the steps
>>
>> *If you cannot accept step one that is sufficient evidence to me*
>> *that you are insufficiently honest until you show otherwise*
>>
>> *If you cannot accept step one that is sufficient evidence to me*
>> *that you are insufficiently honest until you show otherwise*
>>
>> *If you cannot accept step one that is sufficient evidence to me*
>> *that you are insufficiently honest until you show otherwise*
>>
>> *If you cannot accept step one that is sufficient evidence to me*
>> *that you are insufficiently honest until you show otherwise*
>>
>> *If you cannot accept step one that is sufficient evidence to me*
>> *that you are insufficiently honest until you show otherwise*
>>
> 
> If you will not accept the implication of your definitions, that is 
> proof to me that you are just a total ignorant hypocritical 
> pathologocial lying idiot.
> 
> 

I ask for specific reasoning and instead you provide insults
this is additional evidence that you are a dishonest troll.

You have provided valuable feedback that has got us to this
point in our dialogue. I told a close friend that your review
of my work has greatly increased the quality of my words.

Now that these words finally are very good you deny easily
verified facts.

This could possibly result in your eternal incineration even
if I myself doubt it.

Revelation 21:8
But as for the cowardly, the faithless,[a] the polluted, the murderers,
the sexually immoral,[b] the sorcerers, the idolaters, and all liars,
their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which
is the second death.”

I asked a street preacher with a masters degree in divinity about this
last night and he said agreed that a woman that consistently lies about
her weight by one pound condemns herself if she does not repent.

My church says that only those the know the truth and deny it anyway
will be so condemned.

According to the bible the only unpardonable sin is blasphemy against
the Holy Spirit.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer