Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 5/2/2024 4:16 AM, Mikko wrote:Because your system doesn't meet the basic requirement of the problem.On 2024-05-02 03:22:29 +0000, olcott said:It was because 99% of the details did not apply to my system
>When I had to make changes to Bank's the VISA credit card system>
I had to re-read the VISA change document fifteen times before
I was confident that I understood every relevant detail.
It's only because there was no detail that you could not accept.
Had there been one you could have stopped reading as soon you
found it, perhaps even before reading first time to the end.
>
that I had to carefully study all of the details to see which
ones applied.
Proven wrong, and you have FAILED to even attempt to rebut that proof, thus you have accepted that your claim is baseless and are just being a pathological liar by repeating it.Likewise with your proofs: as soon as one error is found thereThere is no error in this and it is a verified fact not requiring
is no need to read further in order to determine that the proof
is erroneous.
>
any subjective judgement call:
(a) It is a verified fact that D(D) simulated by H cannot
possibly reach past line 03 of D(D) simulated by H whether H
aborts its simulation or not.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.