Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones"

From: george (greeneg_at_cs.unc.edu)
Date: 02/01/05 

Date: 1 Feb 2005 08:14:44 -0800

tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote:

> But by saying that it's "problematic to make precise,"
> are you *objecting* to my project of formulating the thesis?

Not in principle, just As Proposed.

> The very nature of my proposed
> thesis prevents it from being *mathematically* precise,

No, really, it doesn't.
Rather, the very nature of "informal counterparts"
prevents THEM from being mathematically precise.
You could still be precise about what you're trying
to say about them.

> just as the
> Church-Turing thesis isn't *mathematically* precise.

!@#$%. It IS SO, TOO, *dumbass* (*-* emphasizing NOT
that you might be dumb, which of course you are NOT,
but rather simply that you have just said something blatantly
easy to contradict technically, and re-emphasizing my personal
determination to use this epithet as I deem appropriate).
The notion of a Turing Machine is mathematically
precise. The only other part of the Church-
Turing thesis is a Pure HOLE, an UNdefined term.
We usually use the term "computable". The so-called
Church-Turing Thesis ISN'T a Thesis: IT IS a PROPOSED
DEFINITION. It is the PROPOSAL that we DEFINE "computable"
to mean "Turing Computable". Reactions-to or dispositions-of
this proposal can range from outright rejection to codification
as The Official Definition of The Technical Term. For the
moment, however, the community is reacting by reserving its
right to broaden the definition of "computable" (or whatEVER
term you want to use to name the definiendum/hole-on-the-left-
side of Church's Thesis) beyond "Turing Computable", if some
compelling reason should arise. Hope springs eternal, I guess.
Personally I don't know what people are still hoping for.
Quantum computing? It is sort of already known that you
can compute more functions if you postulate more/infinitary
capabilities for the machine (e.g. oracles). Originally it
was surely some sort of new way of combining natural language
concepts, some weird sort of combinatoric trick that human
thinkers in natural language knew how to perform with words,
terms, and diagrams, but that the TM paradigm didn't capture.
It is entirely reasonable that that seemed a lot more humanly
possible 70 years ago than it does today.

> That doesn't mean
> that it's too imprecise to formulate as a snappy thesis.

This is sort of a self-solved problem; if you had POSED the
problem well enough for us to get what you mean, it would
ALREADY be "snappy".

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones"
    ... prevents THEM from being mathematically precise. ... Quantum computing? ... It is sort of already known that you ... This is sort of a self-solved problem; ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: OK, where is she?
    ... Nobody thought of teaching kids about computing in those days in our neck of ... I remember going to some sort of exhibition where they had some ... sort of computer, with punch cards, and they tried to explain to us lesser ... We also have the officer's whistle he used in WW1. ...
    (uk.local.cumbria)
  • Re: OK, where is she?
    ... Nobody thought of teaching kids about computing in those days in our neck of ... I remember going to some sort of exhibition where they had some ... sort of computer, with punch cards, and they tried to explain to us lesser ... We also have the officer's whistle he used in WW1. ...
    (uk.local.cumbria)
  • Re: Stupid home non-automation product
    ... One has been able to point-and-click through this sort of computed ... garage at that point. ... "intelligent computing in home automation" ... homeowners and even most/many HA enthusiasts. ...
    (comp.home.automation)
Loading