Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) V3 ---IGNORING ALL OTHER REPLIES

On 6/15/2024 12:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/15/24 12:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/13/2024 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/13/24 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:

>
It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of how H computes
the mapping from the x86 machine language finite string input to
H(D,D) using the finite string transformation rules specified by
the semantics of the x86 programming language that reaches the
behavior of the directly executed D(D)
>

>
Why? I don't claim it can.

>
When I ask you to provide the mapping from the input
to H(D,D) to each step of the behavior of D(D) and
and you refuse then within Socratic questioning you
have proved to not be interested in an honest dialog.

 No, by asking a Red Herring question,

*In other words you DO NOT WANT AN HONEST DIALOGUE*
You either fail to understand that your attempt to answer that
question will increase your understanding or you already know
that the answer to that question proves that I am correct.

*YOU* are showing that YOU are not interested in Honest Dialog, because you have been backed in to a corner.

You are the one that is backed into a corner here and no amount
of pure bluster will get you out. Failing to provide the requested
steps *is construed as your admission that I am correct*
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer