Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.theory > #139453
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, comp.software-eng |
| Subject | Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO |
| Date | 2026-01-24 22:06 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10l44ru$1c2mc$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <10l3vmn$1a2tc$2@dont-email.me> <10l40jg$1attf$1@dont-email.me> <10l41mr$1a2so$5@dont-email.me> <10l43fa$1bm7c$1@dont-email.me> <10l44m3$1a2tc$3@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On 1/24/2026 10:03 PM, dart200 wrote: > On 1/24/26 7:42 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 1/24/2026 9:12 PM, dart200 wrote: >>> On 1/24/26 6:53 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 1/24/2026 8:38 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>> On 1/24/26 6:35 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 1/24/2026 6:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 1/24/26 6:06 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 1/6/2026 1:47 AM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the CT-thesis is a thesis, not a proof. >>>>>>>> *I think that I fixed that* >>>>>>>> It seems to me that if something cannot be computed >>>>>>>> by applying finite string transformation rules to >>>>>>>> input finite strings then it cannot be computed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As soon as this is shown to be categorically impossible >>>>>>>> then the thesis turns into a proof. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words, you just don't know what you are talking about. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It is categorically impossible to define a >>>>>> computation more powerful than that above. >>>>> >>>>> i mean turing machines are just a method to specify string >>>>> transformations on the tape ??? >>>>> >>>>> they are primarily defined by a large transition table for what >>>>> operation is done based on the state of the machine... >>>>> >>>> >>>> No if you look at the Chomsky Hierarchy >>>> they are much more powerful than finite >>>> state machines. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy >>> >>> sorry idk what u mean: Type-0 recursively enumerable langauges, >>> "recognized" by turing machines, are the most "powerful" in that they >>> encompass the "most" computations ... ? >>> >> >> It requires the most powerful machine to recognize them. >> Regular thus finite-state-machines are the weakest. > > i literally said turing machine, not finite-state-automota... ??? > Yes you did. I reread what you said. -- Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br> My 28 year goal has been to make <br> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br> reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.<br><br> This required establishing a new foundation<br>
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 17:06 -0600
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 19:52 -0500
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 18:05 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 13:23 -0500
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:04 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 17:40 -0500
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 22:50 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 01:35 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 11:43 -0500
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 11:45 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 17:28 -0500
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-27 00:00 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 20:35 -0600
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 18:38 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 20:53 -0600
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 19:12 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 21:42 -0600
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 20:03 -0800
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 22:06 -0600
Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? PLO dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 21:45 -0800
csiph-web