# Turing machine: errata in computable numbers paper?

I'm reading Turing On Computable Number 1936, specifically the section pictured here:

Does anyone see errata here? Should the second m-configuration "c" in the table, have the "final m-config" be gothic e instead of the gothic c used?

If this were the case then 010101... could be printed. If not, I'm unsure how 010101... is printed.

Thanks for your input.

• I would just like to say, and with all due respect to Alan Turing: please please please never use both $\mathfrak{c}$ and $\mathfrak{e}$ in the same paper. It's like those calculus teachers that expect you to be able to distinguish between $u, v, \upsilon, \nu$ on a whiteboard. – Aaron Rotenberg Jan 22 '20 at 5:06