arXiv · 1004.2436
Some Mathematicians Are Not Turing Machines
Abstract
A certain mathematician M, considering some hypothesis H, conclusion C and text P, can arrive at one of the following judgments: (1) P does not convince M of the fact that since H, it follows that C; (2) P is the proof that since H, it follows that C (judgment of the type "Proved"). Is it possible to replace such a mathematician with an arbitrary Turing machine? The paper provides a proof that the answer to the question is negative under the two following conditions: (1) M is faultless, namely his judgment "Proved" always implies that since H, it actually follows that C; (2) M recognizes a certain P' as the correct proof of the fact that for certain H' and C', if H', then C' (where P', H', and C' are stated in the paper).
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Evgeny Chutchev. 2010-04-13. Some Mathematicians Are Not Turing Machines. https://arxiv.org/abs/1004.2436
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.