Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down

On 2024-06-03 13:13:44 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/3/2024 4:44 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-02 14:08:49 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 6/2/2024 3:29 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-01 15:30:30 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 6/1/2024 6:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

 ...

*I will not discuss any other points with you until after you either*

 That is a good idea!
 

(a) Acknowledge that DD correctly simulated by HH and ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly
     simulated by embedded_H remain stuck in recursive simulation for
     1 to ∞ of correct simulation or
 (b) Correctly prove otherwise.

 

 Richard continually uses the CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT Straw-man deception
fake rebuttal to make sure there is NEVER ANY closure on any points.
He has been consistently doing this on every point for the last
three years.

 In such situations a valid option is to not respond at all.
Another valid option is to respond to the part that is about
the subject, or to note the lack of disagreement. And of
course you may accept the change of the subject as it does
not prevent you from continuing about the original subject
in other messages.
 

 *Repeat until correct rebuttal*
DD correctly emulated by any HH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT

That does not make sense unless the range of HH is defined.
If the definition is too strict the claim is uninteresting.
If the definition is too loose the claim is false.
--
Mikko