Computing Atlas
Claims this atlas currently marks as unsettled or as tested and found false. A debated fact is one scholars hold competing positions on; a debunked one has been checked against the record and found not to hold. Both are kept in view rather than quietly smoothed over, with the reasoning that put each one where it stands.
41 statements marked Debated.
Zuse Z3, SignificanceShown to be theoretically Turing-complete, within its memory limits, by Raul Rojas in 1998, fifty-five years after the physical machine itself was destroyed; the Z3's obscurity in its own time, not any technical shortfall, is the main reason it rarely features in the ENIAC/Colossus/Atanasoff Berry Computer priority debates.
Zuse Z3, Systems
Standing
Concerns Significance
Currently States Shown to be theoretically Turing-complete, within its memory limits, by Raul Rojas in 1998, fifty-five years after the physical machine itself was destroyed; the Z3's obscurity in its own time, not any technical shortfall, is the main reason it rarely features in the ENIAC/Colossus/Atanasoff Berry Computer priority debates.
Turing-completeness was never demonstrated on the physical Z3, only argued retrospectively in 1998 against its documented design; the machine also lacked conditional branching, which Rojas's argument works around rather than contradicts.
Source Wikipedia: Z3 (computer)