2012/8/14 John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:09 PM, William R. Buckley <
> bill.buck...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Consider that the Turing machine is computational omniscient[...]
> Turing's entire reason for inventing what we now call a Turing Machine was
> to prove that computational omniscience is NOT possible. He rigorously
> proved that no Turing Machine, that is to say no computer, can determine in
> advance if any given computer program will eventually stop.
> For example, it would be very easy to write a program to look for the
> first even number greater than 2 that is not the sum of two prime numbers
> and then stop. But will the machine ever stop? The Turing Machine doesn't
> know, I don't know, you don't know, nobody knows.
Hmmm... well the halting problem is that there is no *general* algorithm to
decide wether or not a given program will stop, it doesn't state that there
is no algorithm that can determine if a particular program will stop or not.
> Maybe it will stop in the next 5 seconds, maybe it will stop in 5 billion
> years, maybe it will never stop. If you want to know what the machine will
> do you just have to watch it and see, and even the machine doesn't know
> what it will do until it does it.
> John K Clark
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at