Sujet : Re: Can Flibble’s neos-based solution still be Turing Complete?
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 25. May 2025, 15:42:17
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <100va8a$1d5lg$8@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/25/2025 1:18 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-05-24 16:02:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 5/23/2025 9:20 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
Yes, **Flibble’s neos-based solution can still be Turing Complete as a
whole**, even though it **disallows programs from referencing the
decider**.
>
Let’s break this down precisely.
>
A more useful application of the term Turing Complete would be that
...
The only useful meaning is what the term actually means. Any other
meaning is harmful.
Analysis of complex theory of computation problems
is much more effective at the higher levels of
abstraction of higher level languages.
For example because the x86 language has relative
addressing the underlying model of computation
specified by the x86 language has unlimited memory
thus is Turing complete.
Turing complete cannot possibly make any actual
difference at all as long as the model of computation
has enough memory for the algorithm.
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer