3 ms·
P.S. everything in the response is wrong ... this person has no idea what it means to be Turing complete. > all we need to be able to do is to read and write a
by jibal 7mo ago
P.S. everything in the response is wrong ... this person has no idea what it means to be Turing complete.
> all we need to be able to do is to read and write a tape or simulation of one
An infinite tape. And to be Turing complete we must "simulate" that tape--the tape head is not Turing complete, the whole UTM is.
> A system that is not even Turing complete is extremely limited.
PDAs are not "extremely limited", and we are more limited than PDAs because of our very finite nature.
- vidarh 7mo ago> P.S. everything in the response is wrong ... this person has no idea what it means to be Turing complete. I know very well what it means to be Turing complete. All the evidence so far, on the other hand suggests you don't. > An infinite tape. And to be Turing complete we must "simulate" that tape--the tape head is not Turing complete, the whole UTM is. An IO port is logically equivalent to infinite tape. > PDAs are not "extremely limited", and we are more limited than PDAs because of our very finite nature. You can trivially execute every step in a Turing machine, hence you are Turing equivalent. It is clear you do not understand the subject at even a basic level.
- jibal 7mo ago> You can trivially execute every step in a Turing machine, hence you are Turing equivalent. It is clear you do not understand the subject at even a basic level. LOL. Such projection. Humans are provably not Turing Complete because they are guaranteed to halt.