On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 11:03:45AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb KatolaZ:
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > > > So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> > > > instantiating software in hardware.
> > >
> > > On the contrary, it's quite easy: what ever can be implemented using a turing machine is not patentable.
> > >
> >
> > That would include also all digital hardware ;) It wouldn't be too
> > bad, indeed...
>
> No, it would not. You cannot implement e.g. an array of transistors on a turing machine, but you can implement a turing machine on an array of transistors :-)
>

A Turing machine can execute any computable function, hence it can
"simuate" the functioning of any classical digital device (your "array
of transistors" is in fact just a network of switches, which takes as
input a certain set of binary signals and produces as output another
set of binary signals).

And since any useful digital device produces an output (effect) in a
time that is polynomial in the size of its input (a set of digital
signals), a classical digital device can indeed be simulated by a
deterministic Turing machine in polynomial time. This means that
simulating a (functioning) digital device is actually in P.

But we are now deeply OT here :)

HND

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]