Chapter 12: The Principle of Computational Equivalence

Section 8: Undecidability and Intractability

History [of undecidability]

In the early 1900s, particularly in the context of the ideas of David Hilbert, it was commonly believed that there should be a finite procedure to decide the truth of any mathematical statement. That this is not the case in the standard theory of arithmetic was in effect established by Kurt Gödel in 1931 (see page 1158). Alonzo Church gave the first explicit example of an undecidable problem in 1935 when he showed that no finite procedure in lambda calculus could guarantee to determine the equivalence of two lambda expressions. (A corollary to Gödel's proof had in fact already supplied another explicit undecidable problem by implying that no finite procedure based on recursive functions could decide whether a given primitive recursive function is identically 0.) In 1936 Alan Turing then showed that the halting problem for Turing machines could not be solved in general in a finite number of steps by any Turing machine. Some similar issues had already been considered by Emil Post in the context of tag and multiway systems starting in the 1920s, and in 1947 Post and Andrei Markov were able to establish that an existing mathematical question—the word problem for semigroups (see page 1141)—was undecidable. By the 1960s undecidability was being found in all sorts of systems, but most of the examples were too complicated to seem of much relevance in practical mathematics or computing. And apart from a few vague mentions in fields like psychology, undecidability was viewed mainly as a highly abstract curiosity of no importance to ordinary science. But in the early 1980s my experiments on cellular automata convinced me that undecidability is vastly more common than had been assumed, and in my 1984 paper "Undecidability and intractability in theoretical physics" I argued that it should be important in many issues in physics and elsewhere.

Image Source Notebooks:

From Stephen Wolfram: A New Kind of Science [citation]