David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Minds and Machines 21 (1):83-96 (2011)
This paper investigates the view that digital hypercomputing is a good reason for rejection or re-interpretation of the Church-Turing thesis. After suggestion that such re-interpretation is historically problematic and often involves attack on a straw man (the ‘maximality thesis’), it discusses proposals for digital hypercomputing with Zeno-machines , i.e. computing machines that compute an infinite number of computing steps in finite time, thus performing supertasks. It argues that effective computing with Zeno-machines falls into a dilemma: either they are specified such that they do not have output states, or they are specified such that they do have output states, but involve contradiction. Repairs though non-effective methods or special rules for semi-decidable problems are sought, but not found. The paper concludes that hypercomputing supertasks are impossible in the actual world and thus no reason for rejection of the Church-Turing thesis in its traditional interpretation
|Keywords||computing computability hypercomputing effective computing supertask Church-Turing thesis Copeland Benacerraf accelerated Turing machine Zeno machine|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jack Copeland (1997). The Broad Conception of Computation. American Behavioral Scientist 40 (6):690-716.
B. Jack Copeland (2008). The Church-Turing Thesis. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Paolo Cotogno (2003). Hypercomputation and the Physical Church-Turing Thesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (2):181-223.
Peter Kugel (2002). Computing Machines Can't Be Intelligent (...And Turing Said So). Minds and Machines 12 (4):563-579.
Carol E. Cleland (1993). Is the Church-Turing Thesis True? Minds and Machines 3 (3):283-312.
B. Jack Copeland & Oron Shagrir (2007). Physical Computation: How General Are Gandy's Principles for Mechanisms? [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 17 (2):217-231.
Leon Horsten (1995). The Church-Turing Thesis and Effective Mundane Procedures. Minds and Machines 5 (1):1-8.
Itamar Pitowsky (2002). Quantum Speed-Up of Computations. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2002 (3):S168-S177.
Oron Shagrir (2002). Effective Computation by Humans and Machines. Minds and Machines 12 (2):221-240.
B. Jack Copeland (2002). Accelerating Turing Machines. Minds and Machines 12 (2):281-300.
Dina Goldin & Peter Wegner (2008). The Interactive Nature of Computing: Refuting the Strong Church–Turing Thesis. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 18 (1):17-38.
Michael Rescorla (2007). Church's Thesis and the Conceptual Analysis of Computability. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 48 (2):253-280.
John T. Kearns (1997). Thinking Machines: Some Fundamental Confusions. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 7 (2):269-87.
Added to index2011-01-03
Total downloads59 ( #28,654 of 1,102,053 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #41,676 of 1,102,053 )
How can I increase my downloads?