Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Analysis_of_Flibble=E2=80=99s_Latest=3A_Detecting_v?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?s=2E_Simulating_Infinite_Recursion_ZFC?=
Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 08:52:25 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <100v7ap$1d5lg$1@dont-email.me>
References: <Ms4XP.801347$BFJ.668081@fx13.ams4>
 <100lmp3$32ven$1@dont-email.me>
 <9af78257f75aa43a76d4b75e226bf92aeaf62463@i2pn2.org>
 <100ngbr$3hg1k$1@dont-email.me> <100p7gf$3voas$2@dont-email.me>
 <100q8cq$5buc$8@dont-email.me>
 <6bd30be886d32bf94f526d777e8ee5a9231cd43d@i2pn2.org>
 <100qlhs$8jis$1@dont-email.me> <100qn3h$7shk$3@dont-email.me>
 <100qo0e$918i$1@dont-email.me> <100qrgo$9mjb$1@dont-email.me>
 <100qrlu$9o8b$1@dont-email.me> <100subv$157b$1@news.muc.de>
 <100sus7$qr00$1@dont-email.me> <100v0rt$2q9j$1@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 15:52:26 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="800f53e41d24e03ecbdf95207701d21d";
	logging-data="1480368"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18n0X1T9gYKh/8cEQ4zB1Jb"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aUOxHaqlssTl5kJ5pytSZy0pN1k=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <100v0rt$2q9j$1@news.muc.de>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250525-0, 5/24/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 5885

On 5/25/2025 7:02 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/24/2025 12:07 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/23/2025 5:06 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>> On 23/05/2025 22:06, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/23/2025 3:50 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>>> On 23/05/2025 21:24, olcott wrote:
> 
>>>>>>> <snip>
> 
>>>>>>>> Liar
> 
>>>>>>> An unequivocal response, but it lacks persuasive power.
> 
> 
>>>>>> When I provide the exact detailed steps of exactly how
>>>>>> people can show that I am wrong and they refuse to
>>>>>> show that I am wrong yet claim that I am wrong this
>>>>>> is the kind of reckless disregard for the truth that
>>>>>> loses defamation cases.
> 
>>>>> When your opponents point to the Turing proof that proves you're wrong
> 
>>>> Without going through all of the detailed steps
>>>> that I present that is a reckless disregard for
>>>> the truth that loses defamation cases.
> 
>>> There you are utterly wrong.  The Halting Theorem has been proven, thus
>>> is true.  Anybody putting up a contrary argument must therefore be wrong.
> 
>>> You might also put up a long winded argument why 2 + 2 = 5, and I would
>>> dismiss this likewise, without bothering to follow your exact detailed
>>> steps.
> 
>>> You've also tried, without success, to dismiss one of the proofs of the
>>> Halting Therem as invalid.
> 
> 
>> And would be successful if people actually paid
>> attention to what I said.  That they say that I
>> am wrong without actually addressing ANY of my
>> points is actionable.
> 
> No, that proof you so much dislike is clearly and quite obviously valid
> to anybody with any background in mathematics at all.
> 

It only seems that way to people not paying attention.
If I was wrong people could show how I am wrong with
reasoning. Instead they are so sure that I am wrong
that they don't bother paying any attention to what I say.

> People have paid a very great deal of attention to what you've said, in
> an effort to help you understand what you haven't understood.  You've
> failed to respond to the help offered.  Instead, you've deluged this
> newsgroup with falsehoods.
> 

If that was true then they would not always make sure
to totally ignore my key points, never actually addressing
these points with reasoning at all.

> That you fail to grasp this proof is entirely down to your lack of
> intellectual capacity.
> 

That you fail to see that I am correct is because you
ignore my key points.

_DDD()
[00002192] 55             push ebp
[00002193] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
[00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192
[0000219a] e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH
[0000219f] 83c404         add esp,+04
[000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
[000021a3] c3             ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]

Since it is an easily verified fact that DDD emulated
by HHH according to the rules of the x86 language
would never stop running unless aborted by HHH.

I can't imagine how anyone disagreeing with this
is not a damned liar. If anyone disagrees knowing
that they simply don't understand these things
they too are also damned liars.

int main()
{
   DDD();  // No matter what the f-ck its caller does
}         // The finite string input to the HHH(DDD)
           // that DDD() calls SPECIFIES a non-halting
           // sequence of configurations.

> If that's "actionable", then I look forward to seeing you in court in
> Nuremberg.  Perhaps first you should learn a little German.
> 
> [ .... ]
> 
>>> Thus, as a general rule, it is sensible to dismiss as not worthy of
>>> attention anything you assert about mathematical logic.
> 
>>> If somebody competent were to put up such a contrary argument, it might
>>> well be worth looking at.  But that's different - and it hasn't happened.
> 
>> -- 
>> Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
> 


-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer