Please don't make me explain this again. Every since we started discussing Iota, you have continued to repeat this same myopia over and over and over and over and over and over again. It is very redundant and it is cluttering the thread with noise. Whoever can't understand this very simple concept by now, isn't likely to ever understand it.
Partial ordering is a weaker requirement than total ordering, making the statement true. It doesn't matter if it is impossible to achieve in practice; I was making a gross simplification to prove a point, but that appears lost on you.
Incorrect. You completely failed to comprehend the explanation I made in my prior post. Try reading it again and again and again until you can comprehend.
Nothing in that post addresses the problem. I'll say it again: If you remove the block reward, you remove the honest miners incentive, along with part of the game theory which makes bitcoin work. What incentive is there in your system to play by the rules for an attacker?
You have shown no such weakness in my current design. Yeah I found flaws in my prior designs. So what. I made it very clear in the past that those designs were still under study and that I was not announcing the details until I was satisfied with my internal review.
Tell me this: how can a recipient know when it is safe to accept a transaction in your design?
I've already shown you why this statement is incorrect. If you'd like me to go into more detail, I will.
No you have not! Damn it, you make me repeat the same explanations over and over and over and over again.
You continue to make the same mistake over and over: rushing to conclusions. There is no concept of time or clocks whatsoever involved in the tree of work idea, only longest chain of work.