Re: Can the 'Turing Problem' be deflated?

george wrote:
On Mar 31, 4:45 pm, J Jones <jonescard...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

"The TM either halts or does not engage in computation."

That should suffice. The statement is analytic -

In the first place, you don't know the definition of "analytic".
Analytic statements are provable BY DEFINITION, but that
may require you to actually KNOW the definitions of the
terms in the statements.

its proof is self-evident.

Only if you actually KNOW the definition of "engage
in computation", and possibly not even then.
In any case, YOU DON'T know the definition of "engage
in computation". You probably don't know the definition of TM
either. And how does any of this relate to what you were
saying BEFORE, about how a TM halts "between" EVERY
step of the process?? By YOUR (incorrect) definition,
every TM is always halting all the time, so there are no
TMs around to fail to "engage in computation".



It's bedtime now so I will just quickly say that I would not want to say that a machine halts between computations. 'Halt' is the recognition of a fulfillment of a command.

And TM's halt all the time, otherwise they are not computing.
.