The high-level algorithm for recognizing 0^2^n strings was defined incorrectly. With this definition any string of zeros would be accepted. The correct way would be: the string is of form 0^2^n iff in the last "crossing" iteration you cross precisely one symbol and it is the rightmost input symbol on the tape.
it's correct, instead of looking last one to be one, he crossed the first 0, then at each tour if he delete an odd number of 0's that mean it's not 0^2^n. (AT 1H:41M:0S)
for the problem 0(to the power)2(to the power)n i.e. 0^2^n......can i start with initial state,then after reading the 1st 0,move right and mark a 0 read by x everytime till a blank space is reached??
The reader pointer must make a move or can it stay on it's current position? Just like : d : Q x T -> Q x T x {L, R, N=none}? note : i've added an N which refers to "no move" so that the pointer wouldn't move.
Actually there exists a TM which has a "stay" "movement" which does what you just described, I know the comment is 4 years old but in case anyone had the same doubt.
You can define it either way, because it can be shown that they are equivalent anyway. If the machine has to always move, then you just have to add some additional states that will reposition the head as if it didn't move. It won't influence the power of the machine in any way, but it would require some superfluous clutter in the states. Adding the "no move" option just removes that clutter and makest the transitions more readable. I would call it a "syntactic sugar" for that machine.
In this case the "power" doesn't mean repeated multiplication by 0, but just repeating the 0 symbol in the string a certain number of times. You can think of it as the number of subsequent zeros in the string, or as the "length" of the string of zeros.
Turing machines do not compute anything, the person programming the machine is the real computer, the machine just carries out the "wishes" of the human programmer.
You're confusing the program with its result and the way of obtaining that result. If you were a baker, this would mean confusing the recipe with the cake and with the process of baking it. When a human writes a program for a computer, he does it because he wants to know an answer for some question. If he knew the answer to begin with, the computation wouldn't be needed at all. Then the computer does the "dirty job" for the human, so that the human didn't have to do the computation himself, which usually would take much more time, because computers are machines that are designed for computations, and they can do computations much faster than humans. They perfom the actual computation for us, by following the program step by step and manipulating some symbols to compute the answer. When the computer doest the computation, the human can do something else, more productive, in the meantime. He couldn't do anything else if he were the one doing the computation, could he? :q
We are solving some very tedious and pointless problems using some very limited tools. Why? I beleive Turing was interested in finding which mathematical processes would terminate and which would go on forever. It is hard to see this being at all useful.
Have you tried to answer this question for yourself? How is a turning machine limited? How does it compare to say your modern day computers? Is there something they can do that a turning machine cannot? stackoverflow.com/questions/7366513/is-a-turing-machine-is-a-real-device-or-an-imaginary-concept
I hoped to learn something about Turing-machines but hit upon a totally inept teacher. I stopped watching when he kept misspelling "Status" and wrote this comment. The man might be a genius , but I'm put off by his many little mistakes and/or uncertainty.
@@bonbonpony He seems like he could be dyslexic. There are plenty of knowledgeable and intelligent people with learning disabilities. It's not particularly right to attribute a person's spelling malfunction with their creditability.
I just want to Thank you, passed my midterm with 86%😭
Amazing series. Thank you for sharing!
Great and simple insight into the problems posed by Turing
The high-level algorithm for recognizing 0^2^n strings was defined incorrectly. With this definition any string of zeros would be accepted. The correct way would be: the string is of form 0^2^n iff in the last "crossing" iteration you cross precisely one symbol and it is the rightmost input symbol on the tape.
it's correct, instead of looking last one to be one, he crossed the first 0, then at each tour if he delete an odd number of 0's that mean it's not 0^2^n. (AT 1H:41M:0S)
for the problem 0(to the power)2(to the power)n i.e. 0^2^n......can i start with initial state,then after reading the 1st 0,move right and mark a 0 read by x everytime till a blank space is reached??
IN DTM, Can there be more than one Qaccept and on ereject states ?
It was helpful. Thank you!
The reader pointer must make a move or can it stay on it's current position?
Just like :
d : Q x T -> Q x T x {L, R, N=none}?
note : i've added an N which refers to "no move" so that the pointer wouldn't move.
+CrashLaker It must move
Actually there exists a TM which has a "stay" "movement" which does what you just described, I know the comment is 4 years old but in case anyone had the same doubt.
You can define it either way, because it can be shown that they are equivalent anyway. If the machine has to always move, then you just have to add some additional states that will reposition the head as if it didn't move. It won't influence the power of the machine in any way, but it would require some superfluous clutter in the states. Adding the "no move" option just removes that clutter and makest the transitions more readable. I would call it a "syntactic sugar" for that machine.
do this unary function f(n)=(n+2) in turing machine design
would it matter whatever the power be given for 0??
In this case the "power" doesn't mean repeated multiplication by 0, but just repeating the 0 symbol in the string a certain number of times. You can think of it as the number of subsequent zeros in the string, or as the "length" of the string of zeros.
Hanzhen harmonic gear , strain wave reducer , robot gear , over 30 years experience ,
thank you
gracias
verg good lecture sir
..status....UC Davis....Vets and Farmers....
A
unintentional asmr
Turing machines do not compute anything, the person programming the machine is the real computer, the machine just carries out the "wishes" of the human programmer.
You're confusing the program with its result and the way of obtaining that result.
If you were a baker, this would mean confusing the recipe with the cake and with the process of baking it.
When a human writes a program for a computer, he does it because he wants to know an answer for some question. If he knew the answer to begin with, the computation wouldn't be needed at all.
Then the computer does the "dirty job" for the human, so that the human didn't have to do the computation himself, which usually would take much more time, because computers are machines that are designed for computations, and they can do computations much faster than humans. They perfom the actual computation for us, by following the program step by step and manipulating some symbols to compute the answer. When the computer doest the computation, the human can do something else, more productive, in the meantime. He couldn't do anything else if he were the one doing the computation, could he? :q
conan o'brien
We are solving some very tedious and pointless problems using some very limited tools.
Why?
I beleive Turing was interested in finding which mathematical processes would terminate and which would go on forever.
It is hard to see this being at all useful.
Have you tried to answer this question for yourself? How is a turning machine limited? How does it compare to say your modern day computers? Is there something they can do that a turning machine cannot?
stackoverflow.com/questions/7366513/is-a-turing-machine-is-a-real-device-or-an-imaginary-concept
I hoped to learn something about Turing-machines but hit upon a totally inept teacher.
I stopped watching when he kept misspelling "Status" and wrote this comment.
The man might be a genius , but I'm put off by his many little mistakes and/or uncertainty.
how do you spell status????????? lol are kidding?
Yeah, how much can you learn from a dude who cannot even spell? :J
@@bonbonpony He seems like he could be dyslexic. There are plenty of knowledgeable and intelligent people with learning disabilities. It's not particularly right to attribute a person's spelling malfunction with their creditability.