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: SunkenCiv
To P or not to P: ay, there is the rub.
44 posted on
08/15/2010 7:08:45 AM PDT by
decimon
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson