Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 3/24/2025 7:00 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
Those are called computations or algorithms, not computable functions.In the post you were responding to I pointed out that computable functions are mathematical objects.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
Computable functions implemented using models of computation
would seem to be more concrete than pure math functions.
For example pure math functions don't have any specificNo they don't. Why would they? A mathematical function is simply a static mapping from elements of a domain to elements of a codomain.
storage like a tape or machine registers.
This also would seem to mean that they would requireThe natural number 12579 maps equally to the (decimal) string '012579', '0012579',... so there is no bijection.
some actual input.
The above copypasta doesn't address this.When implemented using an actual model of computation
>
I pointed out that the domain of a computable function needn't be a string. The above copypasta doesn't address this.
>
some concrete form or input seems required.
I pointed out that there is no bijection natural numbers and strings,finite strings of decimal digits: [0123456789]
but rather a one-to-many relation. The above copypasta doesn't address this."12579" would seem to have a bijective mapping to
a single natural number.
But I was not talking about EEE. I was talking about the halting function. All you seem to be claiming above is that whatever EEE computes, it isn't the halting function. Everyone already agrees to that.>I pointed out above that the finite string of x86
I pointed out that the exact same sort of one-to-many relation exists between computations and strings. The above copypasta doesn't address this.
>
machine code correctly emulated by EEE DOES
NOT MAP TO THE BEHAVIOR OF ITS DIRECT EXECUTION.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.