Will we ever know for sure if P=NP or not?

If someone proves it yes, otherwise no

File: tumblr_nljcogDhr91rcoad1o1_1280.jpg (317KB, 1170x1562px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 1170x1562px

We know for sure that [math]P \neq NP[/math]. No-one just has not proved it yet.

>>8442985
>Will we ever know for sure if P=NP or not?
Maybe.

>>8442990

I thought it's VERY LIKE that P != NP but we don't know for sure how to prove that.

>>8443171
Well it's a 50-50 shot. Either P=NP or it doesn't

>>443176
This

NP = P
P = 0, N can be anything

if P != 0
N = 1

>>8442990

Nope. Donald Knuth believes [math]P = NP[/math] and he's the guy who invented the TeX you used to claim the opposite.

>Don Knuth: As you say, I've come to believe that P=NP, namely that there does exist an integer M and an algorithm A that will solve every n-bit problem belonging to the class NP in n^M elementary steps.

>>8443196
>>Don Knuth: As you say, I've come to believe that P=NP, namely that P = NP.

Isn't that what he said there.

>>8443201

No, it isn't.

>>8443204
Yes, it is.

>>8443207
No.

>>8442989
Wrong. It is possible to prove that complexity classes are not equal. For instance, P is a proper subset of EXPTIME.

>>8442990
Wrong.

>>8443201

>clarifies meaning of a symbolic statement with different words
>HURR HE SAID THE SAME THING TWICE

Is it autism?

>>8442985
>go to university
>learn shit like P=NP and the Riemann hypothesis are unsolved
>these people are supposed to teach me
>can't even solve the shit they're supposed to teach
I dropped out the same day and became a successful business man instead.