Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 12:16:44 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <vv22hs$puqs$1@dont-email.me>
References: <TuuNP.2706011$nb1.2053729@fx01.ams4> <87cyd5182l.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vu6lnf$39fls$2@dont-email.me> <vugddv$b21g$2@dont-email.me> <vui4uf$20dpc$1@dont-email.me> <vuivtb$2lf64$3@dont-email.me> <vungtl$2v2kr$1@dont-email.me> <vuoaac$3jn5n$5@dont-email.me> <vuq81v$1hjka$1@dont-email.me> <vutefq$gmbi$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 11:16:45 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ec5b6a2bfbc0083f13e3f26100a138ba";
	logging-data="850780"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+mH8ZHGdu0qDV4Ew5hT4Bf"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YV3fL/4wKtsFHfaE2QNxGcVwQt8=

On 2025-04-30 15:09:45 +0000, olcott said:

> On 4/29/2025 5:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-04-28 16:27:56 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 4/28/2025 4:14 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-04-26 15:59:39 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 4/26/2025 3:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-04-25 16:31:58 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 4/25/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-24 15:11:13 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 4/23/2025 3:52 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-21 23:52:15 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Computer Science Professor Eric Hehner PhD
>>>>>>>>>>> and I all seem to agree that the same view
>>>>>>>>>>> that Flibble has is the correct view.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Others can see that their justification is defective and contradicted
>>>>>>>>>> by a good proof.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Some people claim that the unsolvability of the halting problem is
>>>>>>>>>> unproven but nobody has solved the problem.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> For the last 22 years I have only been refuting the
>>>>>>>>> conventional Halting Problem proof.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Trying to refute. You have not shown any defect in that proof of the
>>>>>>>> theorem. There are other proofs that you don't even try to refute.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Not at all. You have simply not been paying enough attention.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Once we understand that Turing computable functions are only
>>>>>>> allowed
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Turing allowed Turing machines to do whatever they can do.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Strawman deception error of changing the subject away
>>>>> from computable functions.
>>>> 
>>>> Attempt to deceive by a false claim. The term "computable function" is
>>>> defined in terms of Turing machines so Turing machines are on topic.
>>> 
>>> Since there is no universally agreed upon definition
>>> of the Turing Machine language it is impossible to
>>> provide the 100% concrete details in this Turing
>>> Machine language.
>> 
>> Irrelevant. There is sufficient agreement what Turing machines are.
> 
> Turing machine computable functions must apply
> finite string transformation rues to inputs
> to derive outputs.

A Turing machine does not need to require an input. A large part of
Turing's original considerations were about machines that start with
an empty tape and write an infinite string of digits.

> This is not a function that computes the sum(3,2):
> int sum(int x, int y) { return 5; }

A Turing machine that takes two strings that represents the arguments
and writes the string that represents the corresponding value of that
function can be constructed.

All of which is compatible with my comment that there is sufficient
agreement what Turing machines are.

-- 
Mikko