.

>>8639039
N=0 retard

True by virtue of the inherent symmetries (look at the problem and analyze it around the symmetric parts. I don't have words to describe it accurately) Then combine this with a unique key approach aka fitting the smallest digits/numerals to unique keys.

No one on /sci/ will ever answer that

>solve p=np
>don't tell anyone because it's worth way more than $1 million

File: taifid.jpg (39KB, 710x533px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 710x533px

>>8639039
Well, I've thought about it for a good bit, and while this is by no means a proof this is something that I've logically deduced is my answer until I go into theoretical computer science and formally attack the problem.

P pertains to problems that have easily generated answers, while NP pertains to problems that have easily verifiable answers.

The possibility of P=NP would mean that every problem that has easily generated answers has easily verifiable answers, easily pertaining to executive capability within polynomial time.

For now, my answer is P != NP, and my logic here is that with every problem that we previous thought was NP but turns out to be P, subsidiary problems persists, maintaining NP status. This goes on indefinitely, with the boundaries of computational processing being able to handle ever increasingly difficult problems.

Thus, the problems that are NP approach zero but never are truly eliminated, and thus all problems that have easily verifiable solutions can never have easily generated solutions, not all of them.

Thus, P cannot equal NP.

>>8639225
You don't know what you're talking about.

In fact, P is a subset of NP by definition. So P = NP is a question of whether or not NP is a subset of P.

Not getting sucked into another one of these cuck ass threads again though, so I'll leave it at that.

>>8639229
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this issue. While it is not something I'm going to be tackling formally until much later, some educational material would be great if you could refer me to that.

>>8639237
Algorithm Design by K&T deals with this for the entire second half of the book but less formally than Sisper does in his automata theory text. These are both fine introductions.

>>8639245
Thank you, Anon, I've taken note in these sources.

I'm very much entrenched in the applied computer sciences, studying applied computer science on my own time and doing a whole lot of experimental projects related to it that have been on my mind that, considering its my senior year of high school, I want to get done to give some conclusion to this part of my life.

I want to study computer science in university, and definitely want to get into the theoretical side of things.

I may be naive right now in my attempts to conclude a solution to the P=NP, but the thing I love with computational theory is the frontier feeling of it all. The theoretical gives me the feeling of exploration and discovery that the applied gave me so many years ago.

>>8639277
By "applied" I mean utilizing the concepts and theorems of computer science in a discipline of engineering. I realize that may or may not have been unnecessarily vague.

>>8639282
But then again, it is only a matter of time before someone who walks the Earth wonders upon the stars.

>>8639039
should I be able to solve this?

File: 1484055598402.png (1MB, 1144x770px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1144x770px

>>8639324
No. But you should solve me instead.

Is raping Kurisu a solution?

>>8639392
It is for me. Well, she looks more eager/willing in that position. So I would assume that she is inviting me.

Hello. My name is Simon. I am not a rapist.

>>8639277
>>8639282
>>8639285
P?=NP is something that you might aspire to solve sometime before you're 40, if you're very smart, very hard-working, quite lucky, able to get your PhD at one of the best CS departments in the world, and have a great memory.
If you do solve it, your name will go into the annals of history as one of the greatest mathematicians / computer scientists of all time (see Andrew Wiles re. FLT).
You can bet that there are many extremely smart, extremely hard-working, and ravenously competitive CS/Math people working on it right now, and monitoring each other's work, searching for the pathway that no one else has seen to solving the problem.
Good luck.

>>8639392
I want to rape Kurisu, even is that's not the solution

>>8639426
lol

>>8639440
You and I could totally be friends. If you leave out the rape part, unless Kurisu is into rape. Then by all means let me watch :P

Love = (0)!>0

Love = Truth

Love (x) = not knowing love (-x) × knowing love (x) = love (x) + love (x)

Births = INFINITE

Pain | Pleasure = GROWTH

Suffering = A TANGIBLE VALUE OF (PAIN | PLEASURE) THAT EXCEEDS A SUSTAINABLE WAVEFORM &| VARIANCE

>>8639039
N=1 duh.

P=NP
P/P=N
1=N

QED give me 1 million dollars

>>8640003
HOLY SHIT HE SOLVED IT

File: 1000px-P_np_np-complete_np-hard.svg.png (34KB, 1000x625px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1000x625px

>>8640003
This wasn't funny the first 1000 times it was posted, and it's not funny now. Kill yourself.

>>8639039
Please write this as [math]\text{NP} \subseteq \text{P}[/math] to finally put to bed these trite fucking meme answers.

>>8639543
Is this some kind of new meta-bait ?

Cantor's theorem tells us that NP can't possibly be the subset of P.