停机问题是否可以非算法有效地解决？哥德尔句是否在NP中，而不是在P中？
Is the Halting problem effectively solvable non-algorithmically, and is the Goedel sentence in NP, but not in P?
摘要：
我们考虑一个算术关系是图灵可判定的当且仅当它是PA-可证公式的标准表示，这个算术关系对任何给定的自然数到它的自由变元的赋值成立.我们表明，在经典上，这样的论文是，既，不可验证和不可反驳的，而且，它意味着图灵命题是假的，哥德尔的算术谓词R（x），作为一个布尔函数，是在复杂性类NP，但不是在P;和停机问题是有效地解决，虽然不是算法。
英文摘要：
We consider the thesis that an arithmetical relation, which holds for any, given, assignment of natural numbers to its free variables, is Turing-decidable if, and only if, it is the standard representation of a PA-provable formula. We show that, classically, such a thesis is, both, unverifiable and irrefutable, and, that it implies the Turing Thesis is false; that Goedel's arithmetical predicate R(x), treated as a Boolean function, is in the complexity class NP, but not in P; and that the Halting problem is effectively solvable, albeit not algorithmically.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
