- sandboxes wsp cannot access System.Data.SqlClient.SqlClientPermission
- The workflow operation failed because the workflow lookup found no matching item?
- Insert the Litst Items to existing site list
- Workflow not progressing when a task completes
- Do we need to be worried about a baby climbing out of her bed at night?
- Roof is rusted and pitted - Use Flex Seal?
- Create user without password using rest api
- Views field twig template doesnt show loop count
- How can I insert/update external table while do a node_save
- What is the value of armed bystanders in preventing gun deaths?
- What is the difference between metric and KPI?
- Group these cells!
- Theme for LaTeX class beamer
- Was the mistake in the Falcon's cockpit ever fixed?
- Why did Harry and Ron wait to tell the teachers about the Basilisk?
- Spider-Man: Homecoming sequel?
- Looking for novel. Lobster like creatures sailing on a high gravity planet
- Update column values to integers
- Could not fetch table columns while access the mysql database
- What is wrong with this mysql trigger?

# Does showing a problem and its complement are not Turing-decidable means that the language & its complement are not Turing-recognizable?

I was reading the Sipser's book on the Theory of Computation, 3rd edition and came up with a question. "Does showing a problem and its complement are not Turing-decidable means that the language & its complement are not Turing-recognizable?" I believe that the answer is NO, however, the Theorem 5.30 states something different.

There are two problems concerned in this question. One is $A_{TM} = \{

On Page 238, the Theorem 5.30 is stated as follows:

Theorem 5.30 $EQ_{TM}$ is neither Turing-recognizable nor co-Turing-recognizable.

The proof is by mapping reduction of $A_{TM}$ to $\overline{EQ_{TM}}$, and at the same time, reduction from $A_{TM}$ to $EQ_{TM}$. This way, it has shown:

$\overline{EQ_{TM}}$ is Turing-undecidable.

$EQ_{TM}$ is Turing-undecidable.

Note that this reduction does not show that either of $\overlin