Re: Comparison of Flibble's and Damon's Views on the Halting Problem

On 2025-06-15 15:51:43 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/15/2025 5:13 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-13 14:37:12 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
 

- Flibble type-stratifies SHD from the program being analyzed, treating
SHD as a meta-level observer.

 Thus excluding the halting problem from the scope of his work,
as there no such stratification ithe context of the the halting
problem and in particular not in the problem itself.
 

- Damon demands a unified semantic model where simulation and execution
must match behaviorally.

 That requirement is a trivial consequence of the meaning of "simulation".
 

- This explains their persistent disagreement: **Flibble separates layers,
Damon merges them.**

 No, one cannot merge layers where they don't exist in the first place.
 

 I think that Flibble's analysis is completely consistent
with actual type theory.

At least there is no obvious deviation. But that does not matter
as the halting problem is not in the scope of any type theory.
Type theories are about things that cannot halt becase they are
perfectly stable already.
--
Mikko