Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site eagle.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!eagle!prem
From: prem@eagle.UUCP (Swami Devanbu)
Newsgroups: net.ai
Subject: Re: AI and Turing's Thesis
Message-ID: <1260@eagle.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-May-85 17:32:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: eagle.1260
Posted: Mon May 20 17:32:57 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 21-May-85 07:05:28 EDT
References: <113@nvuxf.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit, NJ
Lines: 19

> I take all this to mean that one computer, given the inputs of
> another computer's hardware and software specifications and its input,
> cannot determine if the program will halt, or will go into "infinite
> loop."  In other words, one computer cannot "debug" another.
> 
> Human beings can "debug" programs, and are capable of determining if
> a program goes into "infinite loop."  If human beings can perform an
> activity that Turing machines cannot, they must not be computable.
> Therefore, human intellectual activity cannot be simulated on a machine.



Aha, but can a human "debug" himerself ? If s/he can't, s/he falls 
under the curse of the said thesis as well. 

(take a bow, Socrates)


Swami Devanbu