Re: Bad faith and dishonesty

On 29/05/2025 19:16, olcott wrote:

On 5/29/2025 12:44 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 29/05/2025 17:42, olcott wrote:

THIS POINT IS NOW CLOSED
*HHH does correctly simulate itself simulating DDD*

>
It's as easy as that, eh? Okay.
>
THIS POINT IS NOW CLOSED
Olcott's 'proof' doesn't prove his claim.
>

 Maybe you have no idea what a tautology is.

Maybe you have no idea what s proof is.

All tautologies always prove themselves.
Its the same thing as a self-evident truth.

It's a self-evident truth that your 'proof' is baloney, therefore it's a self-evident truth that your 'proof' is baloney.

In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
by understanding its meaning without proof...

So you admit you have no proof.
Turing's proof /is/ a proof and is self-evidently true, therefore your so-called 'proof' is baloney.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/crank
(informal) An amateur in science or other technical subjects who persistently advocates flawed theories.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within