When you say no one talks about it, isn't that what Turing means when he says: The fallacy in this argument lies in the assumption that Beta is computable.

When you say no one talks about it, isn't that what Turing means when he says: The fallacy in this argument lies in the assumption that Beta is computable. It would be true if we could enumerate the computable sequences by finite means, but the problem of enumerating computable sequences is equivalent to the problem of finding out whether a given number is the D.N of a circle-free machine, and we have no general process for doing this in a finite number of steps.[1] In an LBA can't we always enumerate the computable sequences by finite means? [1] On computable numbers https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Turing_Paper_1936.pdf https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Turing_Paper_1936.pdf