P obviously isn't NP and why the fuck would it

P obviously isn't NP and why the fuck would it

These computer scientists, do they even hack

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=YX40hbAHx3s
claymath.org/millennium-problems/p-vs-np-problem
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

We know that P is not NP, but only "statistically".
It's not formally proven any maybe it never will.

>We know that P is not NP, but only "statistically".
You probably mean intuitively.

>It's not formally proven any maybe it never will.
This.

Maybe that's a better wording, yes.

Can I get a quick rubdown on this?

youtube.com/watch?v=YX40hbAHx3s

if you know it then i'd suggest that you submit your paper for verification and maybe you get a nobel price. then again, you are only a fa/g/got and probably can't even install window, let alone skype.

>can't even install window

Its a complicated problem, faggot.
Quit pretending you have all the answers.
This is why mummy left daddy

N = 1

What's hard about it? You can't possibly expect that a solution to a hard problem will be as easy as checking that solution? What kind of retarded shit is that

Doesnt the fact that sqrt (x) is a lot harder than x^2 already prove n!=np?

prove it.
Protip:maths are not based on intuition.

What if the problem is reversed?

>You can't possibly expect that a solution to a hard problem will be as easy as checking that solution?
Why would you expect to be able to verify a solution to a problem without solving the problem?

>not as easy
That's extremely inaccurate.
In this context taking n^243958734574334 more time would count as "just as easy"

Without a proof, that's an empty claim. Remember: all of those NP-complete problems are reducible in polynomial time to one another. It just takes one such problem having a polynomial time solution to open the floodgates.

Yeah that's true it's for worst case. Still it goes against common sense and thus, is likely wrong.

Both can be solved in polynomial time.
Neither is a lot harder than the other.

Doesnt mean p=np that a problem can be reversed with the same amount of effort?

congratlation, now prove it. No body gives a shit about your opinion on the subject, the proof is all that matters.
Either you prove it with current mathematical tools or you create new ones, get them approved then resolve it.

If there ever is going to be a proof, I am very confident that the proof will prove that P =/= NP.
A proof that P = NP would be very very surprising indeed.

lol fags think they solved p vs np and they don't even know what it means

same thing happens with quantum mechanics, everyone talks like they know about it when they don't know shit

>P obviously isn't NP
The Axiom of Choice is obviously true, the well-ordering principle obviously false, and who can tell about Zorn's lemma?

It's likely that difficult to prove. We'd just need to add a new axiom that is intuitively obvious and leads to P!=NP short of actually making P!=NP the axiom.
I don't think inventing this new axiom would win you the millennium prize though, as you didn't prove it with the previous system.

congratulations on catching up with the rest of the population on this topic.

someone take a screenshot of this thread and submit it for the $1m prize:

claymath.org/millennium-problems/p-vs-np-problem