Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP
From: Mikhail N. Kupchik (mikhkup_at_mail.ru)
Date: 04/04/04
- Next message: Charlie-Boo: "Re: functions that halt"
- Previous message: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- In reply to: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Next in thread: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Reply: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 16:33:16 +0300
"Jim Nastos" <nastos@cs.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004, Mikhail N. Kupchik wrote:
> > I mean we choose A with no constraints on time-compexity degree.
> > ( it can be O(n), O(n^2), ... an so on - there is no upper limit )
> > but surely when A is fixed its complexity degree is known, fixed, and
> > limited ;-)
>
> Your statement that "there is no upper limit" is actually incorrect, as
your
> next phrase indicates, since any A in P will be accepted by some TM
> which is time-bounded by some O(n^k) for some finite k.
>
My statement is correct. We can build such reduction only supposing that
P=NP. And because arbitrary decision problem from P cannot be accepted by
time-bounded TM (by some O(n^k) for some finite k), we come to conclusion
that supposition was wrong.
I suggest you to read the proof (at least the sketch) first, then try to
refute it.
-- Mikhail Kupchik
- Next message: Charlie-Boo: "Re: functions that halt"
- Previous message: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- In reply to: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Next in thread: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Reply: Jim Nastos: "Re: P vs NP: my proof of P != NP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|