- Registrado
- 8 de Ago, 2020
I kinda doubt it...
Does P = NP?
- Iniciador del tema Penis Drager
- Fecha de inicio
-
🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa. -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Registrado
- 29 de Mayo, 2021
According to my CS theory homework: no. Proof?
The N variable is only on one side of the equation.
The N variable is only on one side of the equation.
- Registrado
- 8 de Ago, 2020
N could = 1...
- Registrado
- 11 de Jul, 2021
- Registrado
- 29 de Mayo, 2021
Well shit.
- Registrado
- 24 de Feb, 2021
The answer is probably Pineapple.
- Registrado
- 15 de Sep, 2019
Probably not. If it did that'd be pretty based though
- Registrado
- 11 de Jul, 2020
I like socks.
These are the socks I wear when I do computer stuff. They make me look like a super cute hacker (or, as my friends say on the internet; Le Kawaii H4xx0r!)
But enough about my credentials.
I believe P means "polynomial time" - as in, a problem that can be solved in a reasonably efficient number of steps - and NP means "nondeterministic polynomial time" - as in, a problem whose solution is not currently know, but whose answer (once attained by, for example, a hypothetical, nondeterministic computer) can be verified in polynomial time. Both of these are sets of problems, not a specific problem (so proving one instance of NP is P would not, in and of itself, be sufficient to show N=NP) , and the N in NP is not a separate variable, but just part of the way we choose to identify that particular set (so N will not equal 1, such that P=1P)
But this stuff isn't covered on my sock, so how the fuck should I know?!
Go ask that Indian guy, the one who keeps staring at me; he likes all that brainy math stuff. I've got a speedrun tournament to practice for, and I can't help you solve fundamental issues in computer science.
These are the socks I wear when I do computer stuff. They make me look like a super cute hacker (or, as my friends say on the internet; Le Kawaii H4xx0r!)
But enough about my credentials.
Yes, if it was a simple algebraic equation, but I don't think NP means N*P.
I believe P means "polynomial time" - as in, a problem that can be solved in a reasonably efficient number of steps - and NP means "nondeterministic polynomial time" - as in, a problem whose solution is not currently know, but whose answer (once attained by, for example, a hypothetical, nondeterministic computer) can be verified in polynomial time. Both of these are sets of problems, not a specific problem (so proving one instance of NP is P would not, in and of itself, be sufficient to show N=NP) , and the N in NP is not a separate variable, but just part of the way we choose to identify that particular set (so N will not equal 1, such that P=1P)
But this stuff isn't covered on my sock, so how the fuck should I know?!
Go ask that Indian guy, the one who keeps staring at me; he likes all that brainy math stuff. I've got a speedrun tournament to practice for, and I can't help you solve fundamental issues in computer science.
- Registrado
- 29 de Mayo, 2021
I'll ask my buddy once he gets back from the designated shitting street.
- Registrado
- 5 de Feb, 2021
No, and I have discovered a truly marvellous demonstration of this proposition that this margin is too narrow to contain.
- Registrado
- 17 de Ago, 2018
That is not quite right. If you can show that one NP-hard problem in NP is also in P, you have proven P=NP.
So you have to find some really clever algorithm that solves such a problem in polynomial time.
Or prove that such an algorithm can not possibly exist to proof P /= NP.