To: LibWhacker
What does this mean in english?
2 posted on
08/14/2010 8:02:51 PM PDT by
Mmogamer
(I refudiate the lamestream media, leftists and their prevaricutions.)
To: LibWhacker
Yeah, well, I exploded the proof the first day it came out. Guy forgot to carry the 5.
/obvious bunkum
5 posted on
08/14/2010 8:10:27 PM PDT by
Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
(The success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity. - Dr. Wm R. Thompson)
To: LibWhacker
100 pages? Wouldn't 0≠1 do? Where's my million?
8 posted on
08/14/2010 8:25:39 PM PDT by
skr
(May God confound the enemy)
To: LibWhacker
12 posted on
08/14/2010 8:40:18 PM PDT by
JRios1968
(The real first rule of Fight Club: don't invite Chuck Norris...EVER)
To: LibWhacker
*ahem* I suggest they look
really carefully at page 37.
That's all I'm sayin'.
To: LibWhacker
"prove P ≠ NP otherwise known as the "P vs NP" problem seems to be running into trouble. " They just need to change P to lower case; and it will balance.
30 posted on
08/14/2010 9:27:14 PM PDT by
HereInTheHeartland
(I aspire to a large carbon footprint; just like Al Gore's)
To: LibWhacker
Math U Philosophy = Bi polar dude.
I had a room mate just after college that was just about to finish a MS in math at Texas Tech. He disappeared one day. The finally called and said he checked himself into a mental hospital.
41 posted on
08/14/2010 10:15:53 PM PDT by
ThomasThomas
(Isn't enough always enough?)
To: LibWhacker; Lonesome in Massachussets; decimon; neverdem; Ernest_at_the_Beach; AdmSmith; ...
There's an important alternative to Clarke's Third Law -- any mathematical proof sufficiently complicated is indistinguishable from magic." ;')
...the latest attempt to prove P ≠ NP -- otherwise known as the "P vs NP" problem -- seems to be running into trouble... The problem concerns the speed at which a computer can accomplish a task such as factorising a number. Roughly speaking, P is the set of problems that can be computed quickly, while NP contains problems for which the answer can be checked quickly... It is generally suspected that P ≠ NP. If this is so, it would impose severe limits on what computers can accomplish.
43 posted on
08/15/2010 6:46:24 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
To: LibWhacker
I don’t understand why this is so hard P requires one operation.
NP requires at least two
45 posted on
08/15/2010 7:19:58 AM PDT by
downwdims
(It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority)
To: LibWhacker
As an engineer (not a scientist) I can’t help but feel more than a little sad every time I think of how the USA in 1984 literally threw away the pre-eminent institution of private basic research in the world....Bell Telephone Laboratories.
Had this institution and its corporate relationships and basic research been permitted to flourish as it had for decades, I have no doubt that this particular problem would have been solved years ago along with many others.
Candidly speaking I see a US government that has worked very hard and deliberative to destroy the once preeminent standing of the USA in research and manufacturing and exchange that capability so that a few crooks on Wall Street could make far too much money, and frankly I’m very ticked about it.
Today Bell Labs is just another typical corporate lab and it is owned by the French and Alcatel.
http://www.linfo.org/bell_labs.html
To: LibWhacker
They need to ask P-Daddy.
64 posted on
08/17/2010 12:35:24 PM PDT by
TomasUSMC
( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
To: LibWhacker
Neil Immerman of the University of Massachusetts, who claims to have found a "serious hole" in Deolalikar's paper.
What a rat! That's the last time I ever discuss Deolalikar's paper with Neil in Hooter's on a Friday night..........the punk's taking all the credit!
68 posted on
08/22/2010 6:30:32 PM PDT by
Hot Tabasco
(Peanut bunker was just peanut bunker until I found Free Republic.........)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson