According to wikipedia, every finite set is computable. Definition: set $S \subset N$ is computable if there exists an algorithm which defines in finite time if a given number $n$ is in Set.
Question: what is wrong with this counter-example:
- given some $TM$
- $S \subset N$
- Lets assume $S$ could contain only $0$, i.e., either $S = \{0\}$ or $S = \emptyset$
- if a given $TM$ halts then $S=\{0\}$ otherwise $S=\emptyset$
So set $S$ is finite, but not computable, since we cannot "compute" if a given $TM$ halts.
What is wrong above?
Asked By : Ayrat
Answered By : svinja
A similar question was answered here:
How can it be decidable whether $\pi$ has some sequence of digits?
We can ignore the question "if a given TM halts" as it is irrelevant what the question actually is, let's just name the condition C
.
If C
is true, then the correct algorithm is if n == 0 return true else return false
. If C
is false, the correct algorithm is return false
. Whether C is true or false, one of these two algorithms is correct for every n, so such an algorithm exists.
Additionally, "does a given TM halt" is computable for the same reason - the correct algorithm is either return true
or return false
. What is not computable is a function that answers "does this TM halt" for any TM.
Best Answer from StackOverflow
Question Source : http://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/13173
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Let us know your responses and feedback