Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: superlinuar speedups What says theory?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 11:59:12 10/08/01

Go up one level in this thread


On October 08, 2001 at 13:52:56, Olaf Jenkner wrote:

>I'm mathemathician. I believe that every student of informatics learnt something
>about this topic. Maybe we can construct a turing machine to prove the
>impossibilaty of SS. Is this the case? If it is, why does Dr. Hyatt waste his
>time to convince people about it?
>
>OJe


Simply because I have become a "teacher" over the past 31 years of my life
as a university faculty member.  And such "myths" need to be corrected when
they show up, else they become self-propogating 'truths' that are anything
but that...

I have given the simple approach to proving this that is given in most every
book I have seen (the time-slicing approach).  I have referenced the formal
proof in theory books that show "A two-tape (which is really a two-instruction
stream) Turing machine has no more computational power than a one-tape (one
instruction stream) computer."  I have taken _every_ suggested algorithm that
supposedly exhibits super-linear speedup and shown through simple mathematical
analysis that the average is _never_ super-linear.

I'm not sure what else can be done.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.