I don't get it.

There is nothing to get. This is gamer webcomic "it's a reference therefore it's funny" tier.

>>77434702
Well, then I don't get the reference.

>>77434702
what?

It's just shitty math, an incorrect proof where P=0 but can't because e to the power of 0 isn't -1.

It's like that "proof" that end in 2 equals 1 after they divide by zero

>>77434733
Wait, P supposedly equals 0, but what is NP then?

>>77434733
p sure the joke is that π is split into p and i anon

>>77434773
NP just means not P

>>77434677
Look, I used something called "Google" to research "what is P=NP".

There's even a wikipedia page, or if that's too tough for ya,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem

try the Simple English wiki page!

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP

>>77434793
Why wouldn't the final term be P =/= P then?
I saw it as a double variable, not a single one.

>>77434779
If you could call that a joke

>>77434773
P is the set of problems whose solution can be found in polynomial time.
NP is the set of problems where a solution can be verified in polynomial time.

Saying that the question of P=NP can be answered by assuming that P and N are separate symbols is a joke that goes more than 50 years and has been beaten to death for just as long. Zach simply was too lazy to do a real comic.

>>77434844
It's a reference, anon. That automatically makes it funny. Just like saying "the cake is a lie". Why aren't you laughing?

For christ's sake! You must have basic/advanced knowledge of math, physics, cs, philosophy and economic. And if you don't just google it!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem

When you say the solution it sounds like "Har-Dee-Har-Har".

>>77434834
>>77434909
I had no idea that this was an established problem, and was google searchign the image rather than the conclusion.

Thank you for your time.

As a grad math student, I didn't bother. His proof jokes are never funny.

>>77434942
Np! Ahah!

File: it says you are a bad fellow, m'lad.jpg (132KB, 830x900px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 830x900px

>>77434677

>>77434845
But there's no N symbol in the proof

The joke seems to be splitting Pi into P times i but the N is just kinda slapped into the last part for no raisin

>>77434895
US GAMERS

>>77434793
NP doesn't mean not P, it means nondeterministic polynomial time. Which basically means "this problem has a solution in polynomial time in a theoretical Turing machine that can perform infinitely many parallel (i.e. not communicating with each other) threads at once."

Whereas P means that "this problem has a solution in polynomial time in a Turing machine (i.e. a real computer)."

NP may imply P, or it may not. P obviously implies NP

>>77435016
It's another joke.

If a = 0, then a = b*a, because 0 = 0

>>77435100
But what if N is infinity, it would be an indeterminate form

>>77434773

If you have 0 problems (P=0) then the amount of time it takes to solve those problems must also equal 0 (because any multiple N of P must also equal 0), QED.

The "joke" is I think that in mathermatics classes you will often be told to "solve" for a given equation, and the methodology presented is a method to solve P=NP for P=0, which isn't what the P=NP problem IS.

And the only reason I bothered thinking about this as much as I have because I briefly thought there might be a "99 problems" reference hidden in the maths that ALSO "solved" P=NP, thereby meaning that JZ = P=NP, QED.