Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Practical Intractability: A Critique of the Hypercomputation Movement. [REVIEW]Aran Nayebi - 2014 - Minds and Machines 24 (3):275-305.
    For over a decade, the hypercomputation movement has produced computational models that in theory solve the algorithmically unsolvable, but they are not physically realizable according to currently accepted physical theories. While opponents to the hypercomputation movement provide arguments against the physical realizability of specific models in order to demonstrate this, these arguments lack the generality to be a satisfactory justification against the construction of any information-processing machine that computes beyond the universal Turing machine. To this end, I present a more (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Can Machines Think? An Old Question Reformulated.Achim Hoffmann - 2010 - Minds and Machines 20 (2):203-212.
    This paper revisits the often debated question Can machines think? It is argued that the usual identification of machines with the notion of algorithm has been both counter-intuitive and counter-productive. This is based on the fact that the notion of algorithm just requires an algorithm to contain a finite but arbitrary number of rules. It is argued that intuitively people tend to think of an algorithm to have a rather limited number of rules. The paper will further propose a modification (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • A natural axiomatization of computability and proof of Church’s thesis.Nachum Dershowitz & Yuri Gurevich - 2008 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (3):299-350.
    Church's Thesis asserts that the only numeric functions that can be calculated by effective means are the recursive ones, which are the same, extensionally, as the Turing-computable numeric functions. The Abstract State Machine Theorem states that every classical algorithm is behaviorally equivalent to an abstract state machine. This theorem presupposes three natural postulates about algorithmic computation. Here, we show that augmenting those postulates with an additional requirement regarding basic operations gives a natural axiomatization of computability and a proof of Church's (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Physical Computation: How General are Gandy’s Principles for Mechanisms?B. Jack Copeland & Oron Shagrir - 2007 - Minds and Machines 17 (2):217-231.
    What are the limits of physical computation? In his ‘Church’s Thesis and Principles for Mechanisms’, Turing’s student Robin Gandy proved that any machine satisfying four idealised physical ‘principles’ is equivalent to some Turing machine. Gandy’s four principles in effect define a class of computing machines (‘Gandy machines’). Our question is: What is the relationship of this class to the class of all (ideal) physical computing machines? Gandy himself suggests that the relationship is identity. We do not share this view. We (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Foundational analyses of computation.Yuri Gurevich - 2012 - In S. Barry Cooper (ed.), How the World Computes. pp. 264--275.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Physical Church–Turing Thesis: Modest or Bold?Gualtiero Piccinini - 2011 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62 (4):733-769.
    This article defends a modest version of the Physical Church-Turing thesis (CT). Following an established recent trend, I distinguish between what I call Mathematical CT—the thesis supported by the original arguments for CT—and Physical CT. I then distinguish between bold formulations of Physical CT, according to which any physical process—anything doable by a physical system—is computable by a Turing machine, and modest formulations, according to which any function that is computable by a physical system is computable by a Turing machine. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Not All Computational Methods Are Effective Methods.Mark Sprevak - 2022 - Philosophies 7 (5):113.
    An effective method is a computational method that might, in principle, be executed by a human. In this paper, I argue that there are methods for computing that are not effective methods. The examples I consider are taken primarily from quantum computing, but these are only meant to be illustrative of a much wider class. Quantum inference and quantum parallelism involve steps that might be implemented in multiple physical systems, but cannot be implemented, or at least not at will, by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Should Computability Be Epistemic? a Logical and Physical Point of View.Florent Franchette - 2016 - Philosophies 1 (1):15--27.
    Although the formalizations of computability provided in the 1930s have proven to be equivalent, two different accounts of computability may be distinguished regarding computability as an epistemic concept. While computability, according to the epistemic account, should be based on epistemic constraints related to the capacities of human computers, the non-epistemic account considers computability as based on manipulations of symbols that require no human capacities other than the capacity of manipulating symbols according to a set of rules. In this paper, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark