Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007


Uzytkownik <moustapha.diaby@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1170169477.460641.218740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To me stupidity is to think that you are too smart to learn a subject
before posing as an expert in it. You should notice that my paper is
not at all a "complexity" paper? "P=NP" is only a corrolary in it.
What credentials do you have in math programming or linear
programming?

I have much stronger then you expect :). That I named "stupid calling"
somebody, about whose competence you have no idea about "not competent
enough".

The fact that noone in that community of experts responded to you
should have been a clue to you. But I guess you are too blinded by
whatever your problem is for that.

It is not true, and you even received one of CC's, so why do you write that
nobody answered?


VARIANT A: all of mathematicians, LP, operational research scientists
including my humble person are to dull to understand magnificence of
your
model, and you are the most competent person on planet in subject. We
also
assert that despite of fact there is no flaw in mine counter-example it
does
not exist or is incorrect.

I think you should speak for yourself. Other versions of the paper
have been/will published after peer review.

Ha, ha, ha - Two facts:
1. A.L. pointed review level for INFORMS
2. My paper about Why your method is impossible passed the same review.
Maybe I shall quote yourself "do you think you are better then professors
who reviewed my paper". So what does it prove NOTHING, but that "passing" is
not argument for anything... And I have to admit that for your model it is
only argument, so... you do not have any solid thing proving correctness of
your method.


VARIANT B: you are wrong

As for me - VARIANT B is the one which including my OR knowledge, math
knowledge and proofs I have seen I believe is true. You are free to
believe
in VARIANT A, but in mine opinion you are the only one. Maybe the only
one
who is right... but I guess not :).

So if you expect that anyone will possible believe you it is quite easy:

- show flaw in my counter-example (not assert it is incorrect but point
ONE
missing restriction or variable with illegal value)


I have done this in a myriad ways already... But, I guess you need one
at an idiot's level... I will try when I have some time.

No, you haven't pointed ANY flaw in my example (except your wishes that it
cannot be correct, with NO FACTS BEHIND), and you continue to repeat
"everything is in my paper" - do you think that repeating something makes it
more credible? Only thing you did is "you have presented Mr. Diabys position
that he does not agree with me", but you cannot even present more similar
opinions (one of professors from your own university who is one of
respondees (this email you got in CC) didn't seem to be convinced that you
"conjecture" (as he called your model) is correct. So what authorities stand
by your paper? NONE.

how solid proof (without additional symbols which seem to be confusing
even for you) that any possible BLP solution cannot be better then
optimal
TSP tour and worse then the worst TSP tour (it isn't good enough to
prove
method is correct but you will fail on this, because I have shown
feasible
BLP solution better then optimal TSP tour).

Wouldn't the intelligent thing to do be to clarify what is confusing
before judging?

I have written that they are confusing even for you. I don't know why you do
not understand your model refer to set of symbols which seem to change exact
meaning in paper... I really do not know, but I know that there is no proof
for what I written should be.

PS. And we haven't done any step forward because constantly I am saying
exactly the same - it was written In my publication on 20 Oct 2006 - it
is
you who didn't read it carefully!

No, you are the one who does not what he is saying. You have been
making contradictory statements because you are trying to pose as an
expert in an area you have absolutely no competence in.

Oh, please... could you show me ONE contradicting statements pair I have
made? Some quotations?
As to my expertise in LP, math and complexity... well... you have to agree
that you have no idea about how strong they are... :-))))))))




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007
    ... better understanding of math programming. ... VARIANT A: all of mathematicians, LP, operational research scientists ... TSP tour and worse then the worst TSP tour (it isn't good enough to prove ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Amateur takes on Wiless work
    ... you can learn *some* things from it, as I recall (I sent a review ... > "So, there's this thing, it's called math. ... This is the right way to do mathematics, ... who was a great mathematician and philosopher. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: I am slow in math... how do I improve my speed?
    ... >I am not satisfied at my speed in computing and thinking math. ... Have pride in your uniqueness -- uniqueness can trump speed. ... >at the level of math undergraduate and first year graduate level. ... and let that guide your review. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: My Victory Cruise Review
    ... > I will complete my review this weekend and post it to my website ... > and the Room Steward 10 cabins - it amounts to quite a deal if in fact ... I'd work on a cruise ship for $700 a week plus tips. ... chekc the math again. ...
    (rec.travel.cruises)
  • Most efficient way to learn/review/remember math?
    ... coming comprehensive qualification exam. ... My current approach is to read/review books, for example, Introduction ... My headache is those math equations, ... I can review the notes from time to time: ...
    (sci.math)
Loading