Abstract
We investigate the Church–Kalmár–Kreisel–Turing theses theoretical concerning (necessary) limitations of future computers and of deductive sciences, in view of recent results of classical general relativity theory. We argue that (i) there are several distinguished Church–Turing-type theses (not only one) and (ii) validity of some of these theses depend on the background physical theory we choose to use. In particular, if we choose classical general relativity theory as our background theory, then the above-mentioned limitations (predicted by these theses) become no more necessary, hence certain forms of the Church–Turing thesis cease to be valid (in general relativity). (For other choices of the background theory the answer might be different.) We also look at various “obstacles” to computing a nonrecursive function (by relying on relativistic phenomena) published in the literature and show that they can be avoided (by improving the “design” of our future computer). We also ask ourselves, how all this reflects on the arithmetical hierarchy and the analytical hierarchy of uncomputable functions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Andréka, H., Madarász, J. X., and Németi, I. (1999). Logical analysis of special relativity theory. In Essays Dedicated to Johan van Benthem on the Occasion of His 50th Birthday [CD-ROM], J. Gerbrandy, M. Marx, M. de Rijke, and Y. Yenema, Vossiuspress, Amsterdam University Press.
Andréka, H., Madarász, J. X., Németi, I., with contributions from Andai, A., Sági, G., Sain, I., and Téke, Cs. (2000). On the Logical Structure of Relativity Theories, Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Budapest, Hungary. Also available at http://www.math-inst.hu/pub/algebraic-logic.
Burko, L. M. and Ori, A. (1995). Are physical objects necessarily burnt up by the blue sheet inside a black hole? Physics Review Letters 74, 1064–1066.
Earman, J. (1995). Supertasks. In Bangs, Crunches, Whimpers and Shrieks, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Earman, J. and Norton, J. D. (1993). Forever is a day: Supertasks in Pitowsky and Malament-Hogarth space-times. Philosophical Science 60, 22–42.
Earman, J. and Norton, J. D. (1996). Infinite pains: The problem with supertask. In Benaceraff and His Critics, A. Morton and S. Stick, eds., Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
Earman, J. and Norton, J. D. (1998). Comments on Laraudogoitia's “Classical particles dynamics, indeterminism and supertasks.” British Journal of Philosophy of Science 49, 123–133.
Gandy, R. O. (1980). Church's Thesis and principles for mechanics. In Kleene Symposium, J. Barwise, H. J. Keisler, K. Kunen, eds., North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 123–148.
Grünbaum, A. (1969). Can an infinitude of operations be performed in a finite time? British Journal of Philosophy of Science 20, 203–218.
Hamkins, J. D. and Lewis, A. (2000). Infinite time Turing machines. Journal of Symbolic Logic 65(2), 567–604.
Hawking, S. W. and Ellis, G. F. R. (1973). The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hogarth, M. L. (1994). In Non-Turing Computers and Non-Turing Computability, Vol. 1, D. Hull, M. Forbens, and R. M. Burian, eds., Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, pp. 126–138.
Hogarth, M. L. (in press). Deciding arithmetic in Malament-Hogarth space-time. British Journal of Philosophy of Science.
Kennefick, D. and Ori, A. (1996). Radiation-reaction induced evolution of circular orbits of particles around Kerr black holes. Physical Review D: Particles and Fields 53, 4319–4326.
Kieu, T. D. (2001). Quantum algorithm for the Hilbert's tenth problem. arXiv: hep-th/0110136.
Kreisel, G. (1965). In Lectures in Modern Mathematics, Vol. 3, Mathematical Logic, T. L. Saaty, ed., Wiley, New York, pp. 95–195.
Mazur, P. O. (1984). Black hole uniqueness from a hidden symmetry of Einstein's gravity. General Relativity and Gravity 16, 211–215.
Melia, F. (2000). The heart of the Milky Way. American Scientist, July-Aug., 346–353.
Ng, Y. J. (2000). Clocks, computers, black holes, spacetime foam and Holographic Principle. In Proceedings of Conference Held at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, July 31-Aug. 4, 2000. hep-th/0010234, see also gr-qc/0006105.
-(1987). Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 28(4).
Odifreddi, P. (1989). Classical Recursion Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
O'Neill, B. (1995). The Geometry of Kerr Black Holes, AK Peters, Wellesley, MA.
Ori, A. (1991). Inner structure of a charged black hole: An exact mass-inflation solution. Physics Review Letters 67, 789–792.
Ori, A. (1992). Structure of the singularity inside a realistic rotating black hole. Physics Review Letters 68, 2117–2120.
Ori, A. (1995). Radiative evolution of orbits around a Kerr black hole. Physics Letters A 202, 347–351.
Ori, A. (1997). On the traversability of the Cauchy horizon: Herman and Hiscock's argument revisited. Annals of the Israel Physical Society 13 (Special issue on Internal structures of black holes and spacetime singularities).
Pitowsky, I. (1990). The physical Church Thesis and physical computational complexity. Iyyun 39, 81–99.
Poisson, E. and Israel, W. (1990). Internal structure of black holes. Physical Review D: Particles and Fields 41, 1796–1809.
Pour-El, M. B. and Richards, J. I. (1989). Computability in Analysis and Physics, Springer, Berlin.
Wald, R. M. (1984). General Relativity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Etesi, G., Németi, I. Non-Turing Computations Via Malament–Hogarth Space-Times. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 41, 341–370 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014019225365
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014019225365