Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.szaf.org!news.karotte.org!news.space.net!news.muc.de!.POSTED.news.muc.de!not-for-mail
From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Analysis of =?UTF-8?Q?Flibble=E2=80=99s?= Latest: Detecting vs.
 Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC
Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 17:07:11 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: muc.de e.V.
Message-ID: <100subv$157b$1@news.muc.de>
References: <Ms4XP.801347$BFJ.668081@fx13.ams4>   <100lkdv$32ib3$1@dont-email.me> <100lmif$32v06$1@dont-email.me> <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>
Injection-Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 17:07:11 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.muc.de; posting-host="news.muc.de:2001:608:1000::2";
	logging-data="38123"; mail-complaints-to="news-admin@muc.de"
User-Agent: tin/2.6.4-20241224 ("Helmsdale") (FreeBSD/14.2-RELEASE-p1 (amd64))

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.

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

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).