Abstract
AbstractThe “somewhat vague, intuitive” notion from computability theory of an effective procedure (method) or algorithm can be fairly precisely defined even if it is not sufficiently formal and precise to belong to mathematics proper (in a narrow sense)—and even if (as many have asserted) for that reason the Church–Turing thesis is unprovable. It is proved logically that the class of effective procedures is not decidable, i.e., that there is no effective procedure for ascertaining whether a given procedure is effective. This result is proved directly from the notion itself of an effective procedure, without reliance on any (partly) mathematical lemma, conjecture, or thesis invoking recursiveness or Turing-computability. In fact, there is no reliance on anything very mathematical. The proof does not even appeal to a precise definition of ‘effective procedure’. Instead, it relies solely and entirely on a basic grasp of the intuitive notion of an effective procedure. Though the result that effectiveness is undecidable is not surprising, it is also not without significance. It has the consequence, for example, that the solution to a decision problem, if it is to be complete, must be accompanied by a separate argument that the proposed ascertainment procedure invariably terminates with the correct verdict.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Applied Mathematics,Logic
Reference21 articles.
1. Church, A.: Preliminary report of [2]. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 40, 332–333 (1935)
2. Church, A.: An unsolvable problem of elementary number theory. Am. J. Math. 58, 345–363 (1936)
3. Church, A.: Introduction to Mathematical Logic I. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1956)
4. Church, A.: Logistic System. In: Runes, Dogobert D. (ed.) Dictionary of Philosophy. Philosophical Library, New York (1983)
5. Copeland, J.: The Church-Turing Thesis. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford (2004)
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献