Book claims P = NP

  • A
  • Thread starter Dragonfall
  • Start date

Answers and Replies

  • #2
14,887
12,428
Probably not worth a second of thought. (My thought.)

Edit: Or to quote Carl Sagan: Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Demystifier and S.G. Janssens
  • #3
1,030
4
Well that extraordinary evidence is behind a $100 paywall
 
  • #4
14,887
12,428
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:
  • #5
S.G. Janssens
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
958
728
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 Demystifier, Ibix and fresh_42

Related Threads on Book claims P = NP

  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
824
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
16K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Top