[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: turing machine...who cares?
- Subject: Re: turing machine...who cares?
- From: z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Ralph Silverman)
- Date: 29 Apr 1996 13:57:06 GMT
- Followup-to: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai.alife
- Newsgroups: comp.ai, comp.ai.philosophy, comp.ai.alife
- Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward
- References: <4lr9po$hou@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us> <4lsssr$3mj@news.ox.ac.uk>
- Xref: nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us comp.ai:3615 comp.ai.philosophy:5766 comp.ai.alife:876
Patrick Juola (patrick@gryphon.psych.ox.ac.uk) wrote:
: In article <4lr9po$hou@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us> z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (Ralph Silverman) writes:
: the turing machine was rather fully defined <1942 and
: reasonably, electronic binary digital computer(s)
: postdates this time... now, it is the
: electronic binary digital computer
: that has become so ubiquitous, not the turing machine...
: though there may not be universal agreement
: regarding the essential nature of the computers
: we do, actually, have...
: frequently these are represented as being
: vonneumann machine(s) .
: why is it not more interesting to study the kind
: of computers we have, actually, than the kind we do not ?
: Mr. Silverman, your naivety is starting to astonish me. All computers
: that we are able to build can be shown to be at best equivalent in
: computational abilities to Turing machines -- and furthermore, any
: reasonably intelligent design produces something that, given infinite
: memory, would be exactly equivalent to a Turing machine. So the direct
: answer to your question is that, we *do* study the kind of computers
: we have -- they're Turing machines.
: More generally, I suggest that you find and read a copy of Hopcroft
: and Ullman's _Theory of Automata and Languages_ since most of the
: questions you've been posing recently are quite well answered therein.
: Patrick
--
************begin r.s. response*************
right now i program on
an antiquated
COMPAQ model 2551
286 12
.
even regarding this, now,
modest capability system...
there never has been a
turing machine
made
"...equivalent in computational abilities..."
to it.
also,
if
the interpretation of what a
turing machine
is...
is a
non-finite machine
then
it is very different than
the ones we so customarily use!!!!!!!!!!!!!
************end r.s. response***************
Ralph Silverman
z007400b@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us