Not at all. Humans certainly can 'solve' the halting problem (I presume that by 'solve the halting problem', you mean 'can determine whether a given program halts or not'.
Given a Turing Machine, there is a program which I can determine halts, but the TM cannot.
Um, a TM certainly can't simulate Quake 3, or most of the other programs that you run on your computer. I think what you meant to say is that any algorithm that can be implemented on a computer can be implemented on a TM -- a big difference.
He was stating the conclusion without giving an argument (unfortunately, a common practice). The usual argument is to describe a TM, and then describe a program which is halting but which the TM could not possibly prove to be halting, and the conclusion usually drawn from this is that the human mind must have more 'power' or something than a TM.
'Finite state system' means that it has a finite number of states. The usual Turing Machine is formulated in terms of a number of internal 'states' and a set of rules of what to do next, based on the current state. The stipulation requires that the number of possible internal states be finite.
It is possible to describe a TM without using internal states, too.
Someone else who replied to this captured the point I think you were making: the tape is merely unbounded, not 'infinite'. Any (halting) TM program will never use more than a finite amount of tape.
Even if you could delete one row per picosecond, this would take more than 10^14 years to accomplish.
Therefore your OS would still have to be up so you could see the result.
"quietbit", you are all over this page writing little snide comments followed by ":)" , saying that WebQL is "obviously" so good and everything else is "obviously" shit, and that you edited their webpage, and so on.
Funny how you were silent when the guy who wrote an open source Web SQL thing posted his work earlier.
The review started off well, but it suffered for one thing I hate in reviews: giving too much information. For me, one of the most remarkable aspects of the book was its sudden transformation into the religious and sexual; out of what was, up until that point, "merely" a very interesting study of the human race. Also, I didn't spot the Christ allusion until a page or two before it happened, and that was extremely wonderful too.
To the author -- if you ever review Time Enough For Love, PLEASE do not say ANYTHING about the last section (Da Capo onwards). Thanks:) For the sake of all those poor souls who have not read SIASL and/or TEFL and want the maximum enjoyment.
This is one of those "here, read this" books. Not something you sell based on its content.
As an aside.. free email with SIASL domain (yes that's my address), and here is a movie-review site with exactly the style of reviews that is perfect in information release: JB's -- don't know how many films I've gone to see based on those reviews, and there's only been one ever that I disagree with.:)
Apologies for being a little off-topic..
The only place I've encountered CLNP is in X.25 headers for Eftpos-related transactions. Now, in my country there are only a handful of us that work technically in this field, and I'd be interested to correspond with some overseas Eftpos/etc. workers. Anyone?
You could lock up your Sun servers and throw away the root password, and they would serve mail perfectly for the next 37 years or so.
The Exchange server will require constant maintenance: modifying settings, changing accounts, installing security hole patches, installing OS patches, upgrading OS, rebooting perodically, etc. etc. etc.
I'll try to write this without my fanaticism for 'alternative' pyramid theories being too obvious:)
Has anyone thought to check for other such star alignments, longer ago in the past? Up to, maybe, 12000 years ago? Sure, two stars bisected by the Pole were there ~ 2500 BC, but maybe a similar combination existed longer ago than that.
Also, this assumes that the current rate and tilt of precession is the same as it was then, which may not be the case if any of various theories are to be believed ("Worlds in Collision" et al.)
From several different sources, I have read that there is in fact nothing connecting the Great Pyramid to Khufu (and in fact, next to nothing known of Khufu himself). When questioned, Egyptian priests could not relate the two; the claim that it must have been Khufu because it was built during his reign, is circular,
and the only other piece of evidence is a cartouche (written in red paint, of all things, and spelt incorrectly) of Khufu's name, 'discovered' by an explorer when he was all by himself, in a place already searched.
126 yards without rotation still leaves it facing north:)
I think, considering the distance between the North Pole and the equatorial regions of Egypt, 126 yards would fall well under the 3 arc minutes that she quoted as the 'margin of error'.
Have you tried looking at Deep Blue's source?
Even a simple heuristic is rather complex.
Also, any grandmaster would defeat any chess program on a desktop computer - don't forget that Deep Blue was on specialised, expensive, massive hardware, with fabulous databases.
Yeah, I thought that ICQ was dumb when I first heard about it, so ended up missing out on six digits:(
I play on ICC and consider myself real..:)
I play once or twice a week in serious games at clubs, but it is good fun to sharpen the speed skills by caning lamers too
Here's a clue for you, mate. If you don't like a story, DON'T READ IT. Especially if it's under the Science section as this one is, and not on the main page.
This story talks about some astronomy that may be interesting to astronomy buffs. I am certainly glad that I read it. I don't give two fucks about the Red Hat stories that get posted on the main page, but you don't see me complaining, do you?
No, a modem.. the *rendering* is fast, but the download time is slow. If I browse to a squid-cached page, or a page on my hard drive, it is instant
Re:This is an incorrect definition of NP
on
Does P = NP?
·
· Score: 1
Call me stupid, but can someone explain how a Turing machine can possibly be non-deterministic?
Turing invented his machine as a definition of computation (which is by nature deterministic). Has anyone ever observed a Turing machine do something non-deterministically?
I'll bite. Quantum situations are governed by the entirely deterministic Schrodinger equation. How is your quantum computer non-deterministic? Of course, you're not going to beat it with a Turing machine, but there's a longway between non-computable and non-deterministic.
Slashdot Mirror
Not at all. Humans certainly can 'solve' the halting problem (I presume that by 'solve the halting problem', you mean 'can determine whether a given program halts or not'.
Given a Turing Machine, there is a program which I can determine halts, but the TM cannot.
Um, a TM certainly can't simulate Quake 3, or most of the other programs that you run on your computer. I think what you meant to say is that any algorithm that can be implemented on a computer can be implemented on a TM -- a big difference.
He was stating the conclusion without giving an argument (unfortunately, a common practice). The usual argument is to describe a TM, and then describe a program which is halting but which the TM could not possibly prove to be halting, and the conclusion usually drawn from this is that the human mind must have more 'power' or something than a TM.
'Finite state system' means that it has a finite number of states. The usual Turing Machine is formulated in terms of a number of internal 'states' and a set of rules of what to do next, based on the current state. The stipulation requires that the number of possible internal states be finite.
It is possible to describe a TM without using internal states, too.
Someone else who replied to this captured the point I think you were making: the tape is merely unbounded, not 'infinite'. Any (halting) TM program will never use more than a finite amount of tape.
Hmm, the site seems to be offline. Wonder if it'll be back
I bet you use UNIX. Here's my proof:
Even if you could delete one row per picosecond, this would take more than 10^14 years to accomplish.
Therefore your OS would still have to be up so you could see the result.
"quietbit", you are all over this page writing little snide comments followed by ":)" , saying that WebQL is "obviously" so good and everything else is "obviously" shit, and that you edited their webpage, and so on.
Funny how you were silent when the guy who wrote an open source Web SQL thing posted his work earlier.
Don't you feel slutted now
To the author -- if you ever review Time Enough For Love, PLEASE do not say ANYTHING about the last section (Da Capo onwards). Thanks :) For the sake of all those poor souls who have not read SIASL and/or TEFL and want the maximum enjoyment.
This is one of those "here, read this" books. Not something you sell based on its content.
As an aside.. free email with SIASL domain (yes that's my address), and here is a movie-review site with exactly the style of reviews that is perfect in information release: JB's -- don't know how many films I've gone to see based on those reviews, and there's only been one ever that I disagree with. :)
Apologies for being a little off-topic..
The only place I've encountered CLNP is in X.25 headers for Eftpos-related transactions. Now, in my country there are only a handful of us that work technically in this field, and I'd be interested to correspond with some overseas Eftpos/etc. workers. Anyone?
You could lock up your Sun servers and throw away the root password, and they would serve mail perfectly for the next 37 years or so.
The Exchange server will require constant maintenance: modifying settings, changing accounts, installing security hole patches, installing OS patches, upgrading OS, rebooting perodically, etc. etc. etc.
Can you give reference(s) for that?
Thought these were due for burnup ages ago? :( ! There's beauraucracy for you.
We miss out on fireworks
Well, time to wait for Mir...
I'll try to write this without my fanaticism for 'alternative' pyramid theories being too obvious :)
:)
Has anyone thought to check for other such star alignments, longer ago in the past? Up to, maybe, 12000 years ago? Sure, two stars bisected by the Pole were there ~ 2500 BC, but maybe a similar combination existed longer ago than that.
Also, this assumes that the current rate and tilt of precession is the same as it was then, which may not be the case if any of various theories are to be believed ("Worlds in Collision" et al.)
From several different sources, I have read that there is in fact nothing connecting the Great Pyramid to Khufu (and in fact, next to nothing known of Khufu himself). When questioned, Egyptian priests could not relate the two; the claim that it must have been Khufu because it was built during his reign, is circular,
and the only other piece of evidence is a cartouche (written in red paint, of all things, and spelt incorrectly) of Khufu's name, 'discovered' by an explorer when he was all by himself, in a place already searched.
Let us hold Occam at bay as long as we can
126 yards without rotation still leaves it facing north :)
I think, considering the distance between the North Pole and the equatorial regions of Egypt, 126 yards would fall well under the 3 arc minutes that she quoted as the 'margin of error'.
Have you tried looking at Deep Blue's source?
Even a simple heuristic is rather complex.
Also, any grandmaster would defeat any chess program on a desktop computer - don't forget that Deep Blue was on specialised, expensive, massive hardware, with fabulous databases.
Yeah, I thought that ICQ was dumb when I first heard about it, so ended up missing out on six digits :(
I play on ICC and consider myself real..:)
I play once or twice a week in serious games at clubs, but it is good fun to sharpen the speed skills by caning lamers too
Here's a clue for you, mate. If you don't like a story, DON'T READ IT. Especially if it's under the Science section as this one is, and not on the main page.
This story talks about some astronomy that may be interesting to astronomy buffs. I am certainly glad that I read it. I don't give two fucks about the Red Hat stories that get posted on the main page, but you don't see me complaining, do you?
You have a leet userid. :)
Go to ICC if you haven't already
This is why they are the scientists, and you are not.
No, a modem .. the *rendering* is fast, but the download time is slow. If I browse to a squid-cached page, or a page on my hard drive, it is instant
Call me stupid, but can someone explain how a Turing machine can possibly be non-deterministic?
Turing invented his machine as a definition of computation (which is by nature deterministic). Has anyone ever observed a Turing machine do something non-deterministically?
I'll bite. Quantum situations are governed by the entirely deterministic Schrodinger equation. How is your quantum computer non-deterministic? Of course, you're not going to beat it with a Turing machine, but there's a longway between non-computable and non-deterministic.
I thought creationists didn't believe in cells, DNA, cloning, and so forth.
How can you possibly justify belief in DNA techniques, forming of offspring from parents' DNA, etc., if you do not believe that evolution happens?
My Celeron-300 renders any page in under a second .. perhaps you need a better browser and a better desktop environment.