outlinedbsq1244
Comment
Posted Jul.15th, 2026, viewed 91 times
The explicit misrepresentation is that neither of the two WRI articles cited 6 by Wolfram and 7 by Todd Rowland reject my claim contrary to what the article states The site owner may have set restrictions that prevent you from accessing the site Of course what что такое окр pattern allows simulator A to do is to simulate simulator B I forget whether there are 9 or 5 levels of simulation in the whole proof but together they stretch the argument out to some 55 pages which does restart by letting A read steadily along the tape restarting B each time it encounters a 6 Since no one seems to be defending citations 6 and 7 as supporting this article s statement that WRI rejected my claim would someone in a position to edit the article please remove both them and the statement that WRI has rejected my claim In no sense can this be considered a rejection In the section headed Proof of universality second paragraph there are two misrepresentations in the sentence In their reply to Pratt Wolfram Research and Alex Smith rejected Pratt s claim 6 7 8 9 one explicit and the other implicit It seems odd to me that this would not be explained in the press It might have needed a little further explanation from Wolfram s group to the media to understand these interesting subtle details but you better try to explain this to the media and see if they get something So I honestly don t understand your position at coming here and still once again defend yourself to try to hide that you were wrong simply wrong by adding more prose to your already obscure non sense arguments According to a Wolfram representative 6 Smith s proof uses a definition of universal that is even more liberal than a known liberal definition of Turing s classical definition
In response to comment: