Does P = NP?
نویسنده
چکیده
The paper is made rediculously irrelevant in light of realization that NP is anything a DTM can solve in time 2^p(|n|). One theorem found on one page taking up about 1 inch in exactly one text. The author therefore no longer supports the nonsense it purports.
منابع مشابه
P != NP Proof
This paper demonstrates that P ≠ NP. The way was to generalize the traditional definitions of the classes P and NP, to construct an artificial problem (a generalization to SAT: The XG-SAT, much more difficult than the former) and then to demonstrate that it is in NP but not in P (where the classes P and NP are generalized and called too simply P and NP in this paper, and then it is explained wh...
متن کاملThe Shrinking Property for NP and coNP
We study the shrinking and separation properties (two notions well-known in descriptive set theory) for NP and coNP and show that under reasonable complexity-theoretic assumptions, both properties do not hold for NP and the shrinking property does not hold for coNP. In particular we obtain the following results. 1. NP and coNP do not have the shrinking property, unless PH is finite. In general,...
متن کاملDoes NP not equal P ? C
— Stephen Cook posited SAT is NP-Complete in 1971. If SAT is NP-Complete then, as is generally accepted, any polynomial solution of it must also present a polynomial solution of all NP decision problems. It is here argued, however, that NP is not of necessity equivalent to P, were it shown that SAT is contained in P. This due to a paradox, of nature addressed by both Gödel and Russell, in regar...
متن کاملP is not equal to NP by Modus Tollens
An artificially designed Turing Machine algorithm Mo generates the instances of the satisfiability problem, and check their satisfiability. Under the assumption P = NP , we show that Mo has a certain property, which, without the assumption, Mo does not have. This leads to P 6= NP by
متن کاملCook Versus Karp-Levin: Separating Completeness Notions if NP Is not Small (Extended Abstract)
Under the hypothesis that NP does not have p-measure 0 (roughly, that NP contains more than a negligible subset of exponential time), it is show n that there is a language that is P T -complete (\Cook complete"), but not P m -complete (\Karp-Levin complete"), for NP. This conclusion, widely believed to be true, is not known to follow from P 6= NP or other traditional complexity-theoretic hypoth...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2002