Discrete Transfinite Computation Models

In the past few years there has been a resurgence of interest in discrete models of computation that are allowed to act transfinitely. Such conceptual machines act in simple steps or stages, and have as a paradigm the standard Turing machine. This, during its progress moves one cell at a time, to the left or the right along an unbounded tape that it is reading, and subsequently alters symbols, changes states and moves on. This paradigm has been with us for 70 years, and for much of this chapter we shall consider variants of such a device. Our models will all be discrete acting computational digital models. We shall consider how Turing and other computing machines could possible behave when allowed to perform supertasks (by which we mean that they are allowed to complete an infinite sequence of tasks or operations). Such a machine is usually envisaged with an unbounded tape. If supertasks are allowed then naturally the whole of that tape comes into play, and we can imagine that tape already having some characteristic function written on it. The machine can then act on that tape and is then essentially a computer acting at a higher type, namely that of infinite sequences of 0, 1's, in other words of real numbers. Surprisingly, even if one restricts one's model to, say, a register machine

[1]  M. Hogarth Non-Turing Computers and Non-Turing Computability , 1994, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[2]  S. Smale,et al.  On a theory of computation and complexity over the real numbers; np-completeness , 1989 .

[3]  R. Shore The recursively enumerable α-degrees are dense , 1976 .

[4]  John P. Burgess,et al.  The truth is never simple , 1986, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[5]  Edwin J. Beggs,et al.  Oracles and Advice as Measurements , 2008, UC.

[6]  J. F. Thomson,et al.  Tasks and Super-Tasks , 1954 .

[7]  J. Earman,et al.  Forever Is a Day: Supertasks in Pitowsky and Malament-Hogarth Spacetimes , 1993, Philosophy of Science.

[8]  Philip D. Welch,et al.  Characteristics of discrete transfinite time Turing machine models: Halting times, stabilization times, and Normal Form theorems , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[9]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  Trial and error predicates and the solution to a problem of Mostowski , 1965, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[10]  G. Sacks Higher recursion theory , 1990 .

[11]  Philip D. Welch,et al.  Post's and other problems in higher type supertasks , 2004 .

[12]  Yiannis N. Moschovakis,et al.  Elementary induction on abstract structures , 1974 .

[13]  Jon Barwise,et al.  Admissible sets and structures , 1975 .

[14]  R. Platek Foundations of recursion theory , 1966 .

[15]  George F. R. Ellis,et al.  The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time , 2023 .

[16]  Philip D. Welch Weak systems of determinacy and arithmetical quasi-inductive definitions , 2011, J. Symb. Log..

[17]  M. Hogarth Does general relativity allow an observer to view an eternity in a finite time? , 1992 .

[18]  Joel David Hamkins,et al.  Infinite Time Turing Machines , 1998, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[19]  Tosiyuki Tugue On the partial recursive functions of ordinal numbers , 1964 .

[20]  Peter Koepke,et al.  Ordinal computations , 2006, Math. Struct. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Joel David Hamkins,et al.  Infinite Time Turing Machines With Only One Tape , 1999, Math. Log. Q..

[22]  M. Hogarth Deciding Arithmetic Using SAD Computers , 2004, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[23]  István Németi,et al.  Non-Turing Computations Via Malament–Hogarth Space-Times , 2001 .

[24]  Gaisi Takeuti,et al.  On the recursive functions of ordinal numbers , 1960 .

[25]  E. B. Davies Building Infinite Machines , 2001, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[26]  R. Shore,et al.  SPLITTING AN a-RECURSIVELY ENUMERABLE SET , 2010 .

[27]  N. Cutland Computability: An Introduction to Recursive Function Theory , 1980 .

[28]  Stephen Cole Kleene Turing-machine computable func-tionals of nite types II , 1962 .

[29]  S. C. Kleene,et al.  Recursive functionals and quantifiers of finite types. II , 1959 .

[30]  Michael Rathjen An ordinal analysis of parameter free Π12-comprehension , 2005, Arch. Math. Log..

[31]  Stephen G. Simpson,et al.  Subsystems of second order arithmetic , 1999, Perspectives in mathematical logic.

[32]  Joel David Hamkins,et al.  Post's Problem for ordinal register machines: An explicit approach , 2009, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[33]  Jens Erik Fenstad,et al.  General Recursion Theory: An Axiomatic Approach , 1980 .

[34]  John D. Norton,et al.  Infinite pains: the trouble with supertasks , 1996 .

[35]  S. C. Kleene Recursive Functionals and Quantifiers of Finite Types Revisited II , 1980 .

[36]  Stephen G. Simpson,et al.  On Kleene Degrees of Analytic Sets , 1980 .

[37]  Peter Koepke,et al.  An Enhanced Theory of Infinite Time Register Machines , 2008, CiE.

[38]  P. Welch CONSTRUCTIBILITY (Perspectives in Mathematical Logic) , 1986 .

[39]  Philip D. Welch,et al.  Eventually infinite time Turing machine degrees: infinite time decidable reals , 2000, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[40]  M. Machover The theory of transfinite recursion , 1961 .

[41]  John C. Shepherdson,et al.  Computability of Recursive Functions , 1963, JACM.

[42]  Peter Koepke,et al.  Turing computations on ordinals , 2005, Bull. Symb. Log..

[43]  Stephen G. Simpson,et al.  The α-finite injury method , 1972 .

[44]  Alexander S. Kechris,et al.  On spector classes , 1978 .

[45]  Edwin J. Beggs,et al.  Can Newtonian systems, bounded in space, time, mass and energy compute all functions? , 2007, Theor. Comput. Sci..