Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
>>8951860
GOOD SIR YOU MEAN TO SAY IT IS POSSIBLE FOR SOMETHING TO BE UNDECIDABLE? HOW COULD THAT BE!!!!!! CLEARLY IT HAS TO BE TRUE OR FALSE BUT IF WE CANNOT PROVE IT IT HAS TO BE TRUE AND FALSE BUT THAT CANNOT BE! DOES THIS MEAN THE WHOLE FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS IS WRONG? FOR ONE THING CANNOT BE TRUE AND FALSE AT THE SAME TIME! THAT IS SIMPLY NONSENSICAL!
>>
>>8951860
Brainlet here
If P=NP is undecidable, then surely there is no polytime algorithm for NP complete problems and therefore P =/= NP. If it's shown that there exists such an algorithm that can never be constructed, then theoretically P=NP. Where have I gone wrong?
>>
>>8951977
>Where have I gone wrong?
>Brainlet here
>>
>>8951983
We are all brainlets. There are maybe 30 humans alive that are not brainlets.
I suppose you know the answer to the question?
>>
>>8951994
>We are all brainlets. There are maybe 30 humans alive that are not brainlets.
Not really. Stop trying to make yourself feel better by redefining brainlessness.
>I suppose you know the answer to the question?
I do.
>>
>>8952002
You do not know the answer and furthermore you are a big smelly brainlet with a tiny brain
>>
>>8952004
>hurr durr you're dumb
Nice rectal explosion there, brainlettino.
>>
>>8951977
>If P=NP is undecidable, then surely there is no polytime algorithm for NP complete problems
No. It means that in some models of ZFC there is such an algorithm and in other models there isn't
>>
>>8952004
Ur a piggot
>>
>>8952035
Who said anything about ZFC? Very few CS theories consider it. Either a deterministic Turing Machine with no oracle could possibly solve 3SAT in polynomial time or they cannot.
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3