From 5aad4cbdde4ed562e0cd983ae11adf302fd5e4ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Walker Lynch
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 14:46:52 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] caught up to yyyy in revision
---
document/book/TM-2026.html | 18 ++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/document/book/TM-2026.html b/document/book/TM-2026.html
index 9bbc862..da20e69 100644
--- a/document/book/TM-2026.html
+++ b/document/book/TM-2026.html
@@ -2109,7 +2109,7 @@ Now suppose defining a Turing Machine that initially has the head on the leftmos
This is an assembly-level code description of an instruction sequence. To get it into final form, the labels that appear as instruction arguments would be replaced with their addresses. Symbolic labels would not appear on the tape. As an alternative to using absolute branches, relative branches could be used. Performance will be greatly enhanced for a sequencer that performs relative branching if it contains an adder circuit; otherwise, the addition of offsets would be another TTCA program invocation.
-
+
Symbol in mathematics
@@ -2196,8 +2196,10 @@ Now suppose defining a Turing Machine that initially has the head on the leftmos
Symbol copy consequentiality
- Copying symbol instances is an integral part of the operation of the Turing machine. Typically the programmed control steps are used as a cost metric for running a program. Such steps integrate operations of copying symbols to and from the tape. Thus from a pure step count perspective the cost of the symbol copy is inconsequential, not due to any behavior of a symbol copy, but rather due the symbol copy being subsumed within the definition of the step.
-
+ Copying symbol instances is an integral part of the operation of the Turing machine. Typically the programmed control steps are used as a cost metric for running a program. Such steps integrate operations of copying symbols to and from the tape. Thus from a pure step count perspective the cost of the symbol copy is inconsequential, not due to any behavior of a symbol copy, but rather due to the symbol copy being subsumed within the definition of the step.
+
+
+
However, this is feels unsatisfactory. Here we are tying to build a bridge from computation theory to architecture, and thus we want a step to be a constant time occurrence at least in the average, or at least approximately. To model the symbol copy time, a symbol could be copied a tranche of bits per step, thus giving the copy a step count. Then, if symbols were to grow in tranche count as a program ran longer, then symbol copy of ever longer symbols would be computationally consequential.
@@ -2369,7 +2371,7 @@ Now suppose defining a Turing Machine that initially has the head on the leftmos
An example of a non-Turing tape like model is the Emacs vertical line cursor model, where a cursor is said to be between characters. An ASCII file offers no such feature as 'in between' characters. Like a Turing Machine tape, a medial character in an ASCII file has a left neighbor and a right neighbor character. Any attempt to represent an in between cursor within the file itself would require inserting more characters into the file under the same model of every medial character having a left and a right character. Consequently, though emacs presents a model where cursor is located in between two characters, this model is only due to the interpretation of the functions' actual effects presented to users in the documentation. For example, instead of saying a cursor is located upon a character, and that inserting a character inserts the character to the right of the given character, the manual gives the description that the new character is inserted at the cursor location, where said cursor is in between the given character and its right neighbor. Thus the documentation presents the user with one model, which by necessity of using standard library calls to work with files, is built upon another model.
-
+
Definition
@@ -2593,7 +2595,7 @@ Now suppose defining a Turing Machine that initially has the head on the leftmos
- Let us take the multiplicative inverse of the additive identity as an example, AKA division by zero. In the second order, when we divide, say 6/0, the machine will not reduce. It will return a second order value:
+ Let us take the multiplicative inverse of the additive identity as an example, AKA division by zero. In the second order, when we attempt to compute a division, say 6/0, the machine will not reduce.