Alan Turing, the founder of computer science, demonstrated his visionary thinking ahead of his time in his 1939 (in fact, completed and submitted in 1938) doctoral thesis (On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem). The core of this thesis lies in exploring how to break through the limitations of closed formal systems and purely deterministic machines, aiming to construct a more complete logical system, thus somewhat 'overcoming' the challenges posed by Gödel's incompleteness theorem.
In the thesis, Turing introduced a revolutionary concept—the Oracle Machine (O-machine), which is a type of 'oracle'. This is not a specific physical machine, but a theoretical extension of Turing machines. In addition to having conventional computational abilities, it possesses an abstract 'oracle' or 'divine revelation' that can instantaneously provide answers to certain problems that conventional Turing machines cannot compute. Turing's purpose in proposing the O-machine was to deepen the understanding of the limits of computational power and to explore which problems are solvable when external 'truth' or non-computable information sources are introduced. He even speculated that this O-machine might be closer to the way intelligence operates, as it includes non-deterministic or 'intuitive' components rather than purely algorithmic reasoning.
This coincides with his later thoughts on 'intuition' and 'creativity'. Turing believed that mathematical reasoning is not merely mechanical logical deduction, but also involves intuition and creativity. Intuition is spontaneous judgment, while creativity is a tool that aids intuition. He even speculated that if all intuition and creativity could be reduced to some form of 'exhaustive search', then human thought might also be encompassed by some infinite computation. This inquiry into the essence of human intelligence and the exploration of transcending deterministic computational models constitute the profound core of Turing's thought.
As time flows into the 21st century, when people examine Bitcoin as a disruptive technology, they cannot help but notice some philosophical echoes of Turing's O-machine. The core of Bitcoin lies in its decentralized consensus mechanism—Proof of Work (PoW) and the longest chain rule. Miners compete for the right to record transactions by solving complex computational problems, which can be seen as a form of 'exhaustive search'. The 'consensus' of the Bitcoin network, that is the agreement of all nodes on the state of transactions and the blockchain, is precisely a unique form of 'oracle'.
This 'oracle' does not derive from an external authority, but is a **'relatively oracle that is symbiotic and equal within the organism'**. It originates from the Bitcoin network itself, maintained dynamically by countless decentralized participants (miners and nodes) working collaboratively. The longest chain rule stipulates that all nodes in the network should follow the chain that has accumulated the most proof of work, which is recognized by the system as the current 'truth'. The 'oracle' here is 'relative' because it is not an eternal, unchanging absolute truth, but a consensus voted by the majority of computational power based on the current state of the network.
More critically, the core of Bitcoin's decentralization arises from this 'indeterminate longest chain'. At any given moment, which miner will mine the next block, and which fork will ultimately prevail to become the longest chain, cannot be predetermined. This inherent randomness and unpredictability ensure that no single entity can precisely control the evolution of the chain.
Moreover, the individualized model of Bitcoin's UTXO (Unspent Transaction Output) is also an indispensable cornerstone of its decentralization. Unlike traditional account balance models, UTXO treats each spendable Bitcoin as an independent, indivisible 'individual'. Each transaction's input is an unspent UTXO from prior transactions, and the output generates new UTXOs. This model means that each node only needs to verify whether the relevant UTXOs exist and have not been spent when validating transactions, without relying on a centralized ledger to query the total balance. This highly granular, independently verifiable 'proof of ownership' greatly simplifies the transaction verification process and enhances the system's transparency and resistance to censorship, allowing each participant to independently verify the validity of ownership, thereby reinforcing the decentralization characteristics of the network and eliminating the need for centralized authorities to manage balances.
Thus, rather than saying the O-machine is a 'theoretical prototype' of Bitcoin, it is more accurate to view it as Turing's profound philosophical reflection on transcending existing system limitations in search of more universal truths. This reflection, with its unique foresight, not only explores the limits of computation but also leaves a thought-provoking resonance at the conceptual level for many innovative technologies that followed, including Bitcoin, regarding the core question of 'how to establish decentralized consensus and trust'. Bitcoin, through its unique longest chain rule and UTXO individualized model, has brought this idea of 'relative oracle' and independent verification from pure theory into the real world, profoundly changing our understanding of value, trust, and decentralized systems.
\u003cc-56/\u003e
