正如韦伦·弗林所说:

图灵完备意味着它至少和图灵机一样强大。

我认为这是不正确的，如果一个系统和图灵机一样强大，那么它就是图灵完备的，即机器所做的每一个计算都可以由系统完成，而且系统所做的每一个计算都可以由图灵机完成。

从维基百科:

Turing completeness, named after Alan Turing, is significant in that every plausible design for a computing device so far advanced can be emulated by a universal Turing machine — an observation that has become known as the Church-Turing thesis. Thus, a machine that can act as a universal Turing machine can, in principle, perform any calculation that any other programmable computer is capable of. However, this has nothing to do with the effort required to write a program for the machine, the time it may take for the machine to perform the calculation, or any abilities the machine may possess that are unrelated to computation. While truly Turing-complete machines are very likely physically impossible, as they require unlimited storage, Turing completeness is often loosely attributed to physical machines or programming languages that would be universal if they had unlimited storage. All modern computers are Turing-complete in this sense.

我不知道你怎么能比这更非技术，除了说“图灵完备意味着‘能够在足够的时间和空间内回答可计算的问题’”。

以下是最简单的解释:

图灵完备系统指的是这样一个系统，在这个系统中，可以编写程序来找到答案(尽管不保证运行时间或内存)。

所以，如果有人说“我的新东西是图灵完备的”，这意味着在原则上(尽管通常不是在实践中)它可以用来解决任何计算问题。

有时候这是个玩笑……有人用vi写了一个图灵机模拟器，所以可以说vi是世界上唯一需要的计算引擎。

从根本上讲，图灵完备性是一个简洁的要求，即无界递归。

甚至不受记忆的限制。

我是独立思考的，但这里有一些关于这个论断的讨论。我对LSP的定义提供了更多的上下文。

这里的其他答案并没有直接定义图灵完备性的基本本质。

We call a language Turing-complete if and only if (1) it is decidable by a Turing machine but (2) not by anything less capable than a Turing machine. For instance, the language of palindromes over the alphabet {a, b} is decidable by Turing machines, but also by pushdown automata; so, this language is not Turing-complete. Truly Turing-complete languages - ones that require the full computing power of Turing machines - are pretty rare. Perhaps the language of strings x.y.z where x is a number, y is a Turing-machine and z is an initial tape configuration, and y halts on z in fewer than x! steps - perhaps that qualifies (though it would need to be shown!)

A common imprecise usage confuses Turing-completeness with Turing-equivalence. Turing-equivalence refers to the property of a computational system which can simulate, and which can be simulated by, Turing machines. We might say Java is a Turing-equivalent programming language, for instance, because you can write a Turing-machine simulator in Java, and because you could define a Turing machine that simulates execution of Java programs. According to the Church-Turing thesis, Turing machines can perform any effective computation, so Turing-equivalence means a system is as capable as possible (if the Church-Turing thesis is true!)

图灵等价比真正的图灵完备性更主流;这一点以及“完全”比“等效”短的事实可能解释了为什么“图灵完全”经常被误用为图灵等效，但我离题了。

用最简单的术语来说，图灵完备系统可以解决任何可能的计算问题。

关键要求之一是便签大小不受限制，并且可以倒带访问之前对便签的写操作。

因此在实践中没有一个系统是图灵完备的。

相反，有些系统通过对无界内存建模并执行任何可能的计算来接近图灵完备性。