Check my P=NP proof for errors (based on incompleteness of ZFC)

  • Thread starter Thread starter porton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on a user's request for feedback on their proof of the P=NP problem, which is based on set theory and the incompleteness of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the Axiom of Choice (ZFC). The proof incorporates concepts such as inversions of bijections, algorithms as arguments of other algorithms, and the reduction of the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) to another NP problem. The moderator notes that the discussion is closed due to the unpublished nature of the work and emphasizes the improbability of success given the historical context of the problem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with the Axiom of Choice (ZFC)
  • Familiarity with the P=NP problem and its significance in computer science
  • Knowledge of Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT) and its reductions
  • Concepts of bijections and algorithmic complexity
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the P=NP conjecture in computational theory
  • Study the incompleteness theorems and their relevance to mathematical proofs
  • Explore algorithmic reductions, specifically from SAT to other NP problems
  • Investigate the potential applications of polynomial-time algorithms in real-world scenarios
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for computer scientists, mathematicians, and researchers interested in theoretical computer science, particularly those focused on complexity theory and the P=NP problem.

porton
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Check my P=NP proof for errors.
Please check for errors my proof of P=NP:
PDF file
It is based on set theory and logic (incompleteness of ZFC). It uses also inversions of bijections, algorithms as arguments of other algorithms, reduction of SAT to another NP problem.

[Moderator's note: link removed.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Technology news on Phys.org
porton said:
TL;DR Summary: Check my P=NP proof for errors.

Please check for errors my proof of P=NP:
PDF file
It is based on set theory and logic (incompleteness of ZFC). It uses also inversions of bijections, algorithms as arguments of other algorithms, reduction of SAT to another NP problem.
Sorry, I'm afraid we do not debunk or proofread unpublished work here. A discussion requires publication in a serious science journal.

However, this problem is so old that it is extremely unlikely that you have achieved where hundreds of scientists have failed.

This thread is closed. For interested readers about the problem, see
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/p-vs-np-conjecture-calculations-and-meaning/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
A bit of advice for the lucky one who actually will solve this problem. If it would be ##P=NP## which I seriously doubt, then do not publish it! Deduce a polynomial traveling salesman algorithm instead, secure your copyright, and sell it to the thousands of traffic companies in the world that run trucks, container ships, or airplanes.
 

Similar threads

Replies
52
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K