Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.theory > #34220

Done with Olcott.

Show all headers | View raw

In Message ID <I8ednT5676UOvjT9nZ2dnUU7-SPNnZ2d@giganews.com>, Peter
Olcott admits that he's wrong according to "conventional analysis" and that
discussing with him requires following some "unconventional"
analysis.

PO: I understand where you are coming from. I am coming from somewhere else.
PO: If you analyze what I am saying using conventional analysis then what I
PO: am saying is incorrect.

"Conventional analysis" is the only vessel which lets us sail into every
imaginable universe such that we can be sure of anything. Those
universes are the only "somewhere elses" we need.

In a pointless followup, ID <Ar-dnTUoNf4VOTf9nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
adds:

PO: The whole diagonalization thing is gibberish to me unless it only shows
PO: that incorrect questions do not have correct answers.

There is no point in discussing halting (or anything else) with someone
who thinks diagonalization is gibberish, and acknowledges that he's
being incorrect according to "conventional analysis".

Even if it made sense to follow "unconventional analysis" it would have
to be rigorously pinned down and subsequently adhered to. (I suspect,
that very change would render it conventional, and therefore
unpalatable).  As it stands, the "uncoventional analysis" consists of
religious-like faith to some consistency doctrine, combined with the
rhetorical strategy of insisting "I am right" using whatever bit of
made-up nonsense that vaguely connects the intuition to the current
conversation thread.

-- 
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Done with Olcott. Kaz Kylheku <563-365-8930@kylheku.com> - 2021-05-25 16:56 +0000
  Re: Done with Olcott. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-05-25 21:06 +0100
    Is this understanding of diagonalization correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 15:11 -0500
      Re: Is this understanding of diagonalization correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 15:40 -0500
    Is this understanding of diagonalization correct? CORRECTION olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 16:18 -0500
    Re: Done with Olcott. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-05-26 03:33 +0100
      Re: Done with Olcott. olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 21:43 -0500
        Re: Done with Olcott. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-05-25 23:23 -0400
      Re: Done with Olcott. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-05-26 16:42 +0100
        Re: Done with Olcott. olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-26 11:31 -0500
          Re: Done with Olcott. Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 09:51 -0700
      Re: Done with Olcott. olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-26 11:21 -0500
        Re: Done with Olcott. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-05-26 13:18 -0700
    Is this understanding of diagonalization correct? (final draft) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 16:25 -0500
  Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-05-25 22:02 -0400
    Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 21:57 -0500
      Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-05-25 23:13 -0400
        Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 22:25 -0500
          Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-05-26 08:13 -0400
            Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores(Proxy inputs) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-26 09:18 -0500
              Re: Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores(Proxy inputs) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-05-26 19:29 -0400
  Re: Eliminating the pathological self-reference error of the halting theorem (V11)(Proxy inputs) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 12:15 -0500
  Halting problem and the possibilities that Diagonalization simply ignores olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-05-25 12:52 -0500

csiph-web