begin quoting Lan Barnes as of Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 02:26:54PM -0700: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 02:11:28PM -0700, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: [snip] > > BTW, Turing machines are not the only abstraction for computability. > > IIRC, Lambda Calculus was devloped for the same purpose and it was later > > proved that the two formulations are equivalent. > > If they're equivalent, how does that demonstrate that Turing machines > are not the only abstraction for computability?
It's given that Lambda Calculus and Turing Machines are different abstractions. If they're equivalent, it's been shown that each can simulate the other. So that anything one can compute, so can the other -- and if one can't compute something, neither can the other. -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
