## Abstract

There is an intensive discussion nowadays about the meaning of effective computability, with implications to the status and provability of the Church–Turing Thesis (CTT). I begin by reviewing what has become the dominant account of the way Turing and Church viewed, in 1936, effective computability. According to this account, to which I refer as the Gandy–Sieg account, Turing and Church aimed to characterize the functions that can be computed by a human computer. In addition, Turing provided a highly convincing argument for CTT by analyzing the processes carried out by a human computer. I then contend that if the Gandy–Sieg account is correct, then the notion of effective computability has changed after 1936. Today computer scientists view effective computability in terms of finite machine computation. My contention is supported by the current formulations of CTT, which always refer to machine computation, and by the current argumentation for CTT, which is different from the main arguments advanced by Turing and Church. I finally turn to discuss Robin Gandy's characterization of machine computation. I suggest that there is an ambiguity regarding the types of machines Gandy was postulating. I offer three interpretations, which differ in their scope and limitations, and conclude that none provides the basis for claiming that Gandy characterized finite machine computation.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

### References

- Astrachan, O.L. (2000),
*A Computer Science Tapestry: Exploring Programming and Computer Science*with C++, US: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar - Boolos, G.S. and Jeffrey R.C. (1989),
*Computability and Logic*, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar - Church, A. (1936a), 'An Unsolvable Problem of Elementary Number Theory'
*American Journal of Mathernatics*58, pp. 345–363. Reprinted in Davis (1965), pp. 88–107.Google Scholar - Church, A. (1936b), 'A Note on the Entscheidungsproblem',
*Journal of Symbolic Logic*1, pp. 40–41. Reprinted in Davis (1965), pp. 108–115.Google Scholar - Church, A. (1937a), 'Review of Turing (1936)',
*Journal of Symbolic Logic*2, pp. 42–43.Google Scholar - Church, A. (1937b), 'Review of Post (1936)',
*Journal of Symbolic Logic*2, p. 43.Google Scholar - Cleland, C. (1993), 'Is the Church–Turing Thesis True?',
*Minds and Machines*3, pp. 283–312.Google Scholar - Cleland, C. (forthcoming), 'Effective Procedures and Causal Processes',
*Minds and Machines*.Google Scholar - Copeland, B.J. (1996), The Church–Turing Thesis', in J. Perry and E. Zalta, eds.,
*The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy*. [http://plato.stanford.edu]Google Scholar - Davis, M. (ed.), (1965)
*The Undecidable: Basic Papers on Undecidable Propositions, Unsolvable Problems and Computable Functions*, NewYork: Raven.Google Scholar - Deutsch, D. (1985), 'Quantum Theory: The Church–Turing Principle and the Universal Quantum Computer','
*Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A*400, pp. 97–117.Google Scholar - Gandy, R.O. (1980), 'Church's Thesis and Principles of Mechanisms', in J. Barwise, J.J. Keisler and K. Kunen, eds.,
*The Kleene Symposium*, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 123–145.Google Scholar - Gandy, R.O. (1988), 'The Confluence of Ideas in 1936', in Herken, pp. 55–111.Google Scholar
- Gödel, K. (1931), 'On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems I',
*Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik*38, pp. 173–198. Translated and Reprinted in Davis (1965) pp. 5–38.Google Scholar - Gödel, K. (1946), 'Remarks Before the Princeton Bicentennial Conference on Problems in Mathematics'. Reprinted in Davis (1965), pp. 84–88.Google Scholar
- Harel, D. (1992),
*Algorithms: The Spirit of Computing*(second edition), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar - Herken, R.(ed.) (1988).
*The Universal Turing Machine A Half-Century Survey*, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar - Hilbert, D. and Ackermann, W. (1928),
*Grundzuge der Theoretischen Logic*, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar - Hilbert, D. and Bernays, P. (1939),
*Grundlagen der Mathematik II*, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar - Hogarth, M.L. (1994), 'Non-Turing Computers and Non-Turing Computability',
*Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association (PSA)*1, pp. 126–138.Google Scholar - Hopcroft, J.C. and Ullman, J.D. (1979),
*Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation*, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar - Kleene, S.C. (1936), 'General Recursive Functions of Natural Numbers',
*Mathematische Annalen*112, pp. 727–742. Reprinted in Davis (1965), pp. 236–253.Google Scholar - Kleene, S.C. (1988), 'Turing's Analysis of Computability, and Major Applications of It',' in Herken, pp. 17–54.Google Scholar
- Lewis, H.R. and Papadimitriou, C.H. (1981),
*Elements of the Theory of Computation*, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar - Mancosu, P. (1999), 'Between Russell and Hilbert: Behmann on the Foundations of Mathematics'.
*Bulletin of Symbolic Logic*5, pp. 303–330.Google Scholar - Nagin, P. and Impagliazzo J. (1995),
*Computer Science: A Breadth-First Approach with Pascal*, New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar - Pitowsky, I. (1990), 'The Physical Church Thesis and Physical Computational Complexity',
*Iyyun*39, pp. 81–99.Google Scholar - Post, E.L. (1936), 'Finitary Combinatory Processes – Formulation I',
*Journal of Symbolic Logic*1, pp. 103–105. Reprinted in Davis, (1965), pp. 288–291.Google Scholar - Shagrir, O. (1992) 'A Neural Net with Self-Inhibiting Units for the N-Queens Problem',
*International Journal of Neural Systems*3, pp. 249–252.Google Scholar - Shagrir, O. (1997), 'Two Dogmas of Computationalism'
*Minds and Machines*7, pp. 321–344.Google Scholar - Shagrir, O. and Pitowsky, I. (forthcoming), 'Physical Hypercomputation and the Church–Turing Thesis',
*Minds and Machines*.Google Scholar - Shepherdson, J.C. (1988), 'Mechanisms for Computing Over Arbitratry Structures', in Herken, pp. 537–555.Google Scholar
- Sieg, W. (1994), 'Mechanical Procedures and Mathematical Experience', in A. George, ed.,
*Mathematics and Mind*, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 71–117.Google Scholar - Sieg, W. (1997), 'Step by Recursive Step: Church's Analysis of Effective Calculability',
*Bulletin of Symbolic Logic*2, pp. 154–180.Google Scholar - Sieg, W. (2001), 'Calculation by Man and Machine: Conceptual Analysis', in W. Sieg, R. Sommer and C. Talcott, eds.,
*Reflections on the Foundations of Mathematics (Essays in Honor of Solomon Feferman)*, Volume 15 of Lectures Notes in Logic, Association of Symbolic Logic, pp. 387–406.Google Scholar - Sieg,W. (forthcoming), 'Calculation byMan andMachine: Mathematical Presentation',
*Proceedings of the International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science*(Cracow, 1999), Kluwer, pp. 246–260.Google Scholar - Sieg,W. and Byrnes, J. (1999), 'An Abstract Model for Parallel Computations: Gandy's Thesis',
*The Monist*82, pp. 150–164.Google Scholar - Siegelmann, H.T. (1995), 'Computation Beyond Turing Limit',
*Science*268, pp. 545–548.Google Scholar - Turing, A.M. (1936), 'On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem',
*Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society*(2) 42, pp. 230-265. A correction in 43 (1937), pp. 544–546. Reprinted in Davis (1965), pp. 115–154.Google Scholar - Wolfarm, S. (1985), 'Undecidability and Intractability in Theoretical Physics',
*Physical Review Letters*54, pp. 735–738.Google Scholar