>>10837717>>10837788The matter has been satisfactorily resolved for my own purposes (which, incidentally, are the only purposes about which I care in this context).
There are two different solutions, one of which applies in a certain framework defined as “metacausal”, “precomputational” or “protocomputational”, and the other of which applies in a causal or computational limit thereof. This amounts to a relativization of the solution. Although I can’t say for sure, I suspect that in the view of the “Millennium Prize” Committee, this falls short of an actual Y|N solution, leaving me nothing whatsoever to gain by submission.
(We also have the serious problem of bias on the Millennium Prize Committee, expressed by Andrew Wiles as their complete certainty that no non-academic is capable of solving any of the problems. This, of course, guarantees that the submissions of nonacademics will in effect be circular-filed, leaving them no rational choice but to disregard such prizes, and where necessary, the professional academics who award them to each other.)
