The Turing Guide

(nextflipdebug5) #1

488 | NOTES TO PAGES 56–59



  1. A. W. Burks, H. H. Goldstine, and J. von Neumann, ‘Preliminary discussion of the logical design of an
    electronic computing instrument’, Institute for Advanced Study (28 June 1946), in Collected Works of
    John von Neumann, Vol. 5 (ed. A. H. Taub), Pergamon Press (1961), Section 3.1, p. 37.

  2. Notoriously, Turing’s ‘Proposed electronic calculator’ (Turing (1945)) did not mention the universal
    machine of 1936, leading some commentators to wonder whether it was a direct ancestor of ACE at
    all. However, some fragments of an early draft of Turing’s proposal (Turing (1945a)) cast light on this
    issue: they were published for the first time in Copeland et al. (2005). There Turing specifically related
    ACE to the universal Turing machine, explaining why the memory arrangement described in Turing
    (1936) could not ‘be taken over as it stood to give a practical form of machine’.

  3. Turing (1947), pp. 378 and 383.


CHAPTER 7 HIlBERT AND HIS fAmOUS PROBlEm (COPElAND)



  1. This chapter includes material from my article ‘What did Turing establish about the limits of comput-
    ers and the nature of mathematics’, Big Questions Online, John Templeton Foundation (February
    2013) (https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/). I am grateful to the John Templeton Foundation for
    permission to publish the material here.

  2. For a more detailed account of this pioneering time, see B. J. Copeland, C. Posy, and O. Shagrir, ‘The
    1930s revolution’, in Copeland et al. (2013).

  3. K. Gödel, ‘Uber formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I’
    [On formally undecidable propositions of Principia Mathematica and related systems], Monatshefte
    für Mathematik und Physik, 38 (1931), 173–98; an English translation is in M. Davis (ed.), The
    Undecidable: Basic Papers on Undecidable Propositions, Unsolvable Problems and Computable
    Functions, Raven (1965). To be exact, in 1931 Gödel proved that the system of arithmetic set out
    by Bertrand Russell and Alfred Whitehead in their seminal Principia Mathematica is (if consistent)
    incomplete, in the sense that there are true statements of arithmetic that are not provable in the sys-
    tem. Using Turing’s discoveries, Gödel was later able to generalize this result considerably. The details
    are explained in The Essential Turing, pp. 47–8.

  4. Nowadays this prima facie unpromising escape route has its advocates: see C. Mortensen, Inconsistent
    Mathematics, Kluwer (1995), G. Priest, In Contradiction: a Study of the Transconsistent, Oxford
    University Press (2006); and R. Sylvan and B. J. Copeland, ‘Computability is logic-relative’, in G. Priest
    and D. Hyde (eds), Sociative Logics and their Applications, Ashgate (2000).

  5. M. H. A. Newman, ‘Alan Mathison Turing, 1912–1954’, Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal
    Society, 1 (November 1955), 253–263, p. 256. I say ‘seemed to leave open one of the most fundamental
    problems’ because Gödel’s proof of Theorem X of his 1931 paper does entail the unsolvability of the
    Entscheidungsproblem (given the Church–Turing thesis: see Chapter 41), but this was not noticed
    until 1965, by Martin Davis. It is probably fortunate that Gödel did not settle the decision problem in
    1931, for if he had, then the young logician Alan Turing would not have taken it up, and the history
    of the computer might have unfolded quite differently—and perhaps much less satisfactorily, in the
    absence of Turing’s fundamental concept of universality.

  6. D. Hilbert and W. Ackermann, Grundzüge der Theoretischen Logik [Principles of Mathematical Logic],
    Springer (1928).

  7. D. Hilbert, ‘Mathematical problems: lecture delivered before the International Congress of
    Mathematicians at Paris in 1900’, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 8 (1902), 437–79.

  8. Turing (1936), p. 84.

  9. Hilbert and Ackermann (Note 6).

  10. In Gödel’s notes for his 1939 introductory logic course at the University of Notre Dame, published as
    P. Cassou-Nogues, ‘Gödel’s Introduction to Logic in 1939’, History and Philosophy of Logic, 30 (2009),
    69–90, on p. 85.

  11. Gödel in Cassou-Nogues (Note 10), p. 85.

  12. See B. J. Copeland, ‘Turing’s thesis’, in A. Olszewski, J. Wolenski, and R. Janusz (eds), Church’s Thesis
    after 70 Years, Ontos Verlag (2006), and B. J. Copeland and O. Shagrir, ‘Turing versus Gödel on com-
    putability and the mind’, in Copeland et al. (2013).

Free download pdf