Re: Analysis of Flibble’s Latest: Detecting vs. Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC

On 2025-05-29 01:00:39 +0000, olcott said:

On 5/28/2025 7:48 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:

Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

On 28/05/2025 18:33, olcott wrote:

I am not solving the halting problem.

 Clearly.

 But once upon a time he was.  For example, in this exchange:
 Me: Recent posts have said that you really do claim to have a halting
decider.  Have you extended your claim or was that a
misunderstanding?
 PO: I really do have a halting decider.
 I think it's useful to know that trying to have any discussion with the
OP will eventually feel like nailing jelly to a wall.

 Aug 10, 2020
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/XRw3WhADb8I/m/JOwRQyV6BQAJ
 

 Tarski undefinability can be easily dismissed once the
terms: "truthmaker" and "truthbearer" are fully understood.

Understanding that does not make Tarski undefinablility easier to dismiss.
But the less you understand about it and related things the easier it is
to reject it; or, if you are too honest, at least to call it useless.
--
Mikko