Re: Unpartial Halt Decider 4.0

On 4/18/25 5:28 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 17:15:40 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
 

>
And the rules of the game are that deciders must answer in finite time.

 Your perspective is:
 Epistemic: knowledge must be actionable, and thus based on finite
computation.
 Pragmatic: we need results in time, so knowing whether we’re in a loop is
more valuable than being able to analyze an infinite thing in an infinite
way.
 This is totally reasonable — but my perspective is:
 Not speaking about physical feasibility. I'm working in the theoretical
realm — just as Turing did.
 /Flibble

But the problems still need the finiteness to have use.
Even in the theoretial, "proof" is still required to be finite, as are deciders.
That is the basic rules of the theoretical system.