P=NP: New Proof in Book from World Scientific

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Book
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around a new proof presented in a book by World Scientific claiming the equality of the complexity classes "P" and "NP". Participants express varying levels of skepticism and interest regarding the validity and implications of this proof.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the proof, suggesting that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
  • One participant notes that the evidence is behind a paywall, which may limit access to the proof.
  • Another participant compares the situation to past significant mathematical results, suggesting that a groundbreaking proof would generate substantial discussion and recognition, unlike what they perceive from this case.
  • There is speculation that the proof may involve extensions such as oracles or quantum computing, which could affect the interpretation of the result.
  • One participant finds the previous proof dull and expresses a desire for more engaging arguments.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not agree on the validity or significance of the new proof, with multiple competing views expressed regarding its implications and the nature of the evidence presented.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the nature of the proof and its accessibility are not fully explored, and there is uncertainty regarding the methods used in the proof and their implications for the P vs NP problem.

Mathematics news on Phys.org
Probably not worth a second of thought. (My thought.)

Edit: Or to quote Carl Sagan: Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier and S.G. Janssens
Well that extraordinary evidence is behind a $100 paywall
 
I will wait until 2018 for the next Fields award instead. Seems to be cheaper. To me it is like those headlines nowadays: you get hooked, and if you have a closer look, it results in bare disappointment and anger about the wasted time. I can't imagine such a result in a textbook without any earthquakes far ahead of it. Even Wiles created tsunamis although his proof was understood by at most a dozen people at the time. (Not sure whether this has significantly changed.)

If I remember correctly, then NP can be done in polynomial time if one allows additional means like oracles or something. My bet would be, that the author(s)' arguments go along with such extensions, e.g. quantum computing or restrictions to incomplete NP problems. There has been a theorem on graph isomorphisms recently which pointed in a similar direction, of course without solving NP = P.
 
Last edited:
Dragonfall said:
The book offers a new proof of the equality of the complexity classes "P" and "NP"
It sounds nice. The old proof was rather dull.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier, Ibix and fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
12K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
7K