Whats the big fuzz about?

Whats the big fuzz about?

Its all about simple algebra. If our algebra cant solve this easily, then clearly there's an inherent mistake on the foundational logic onto which we've decide to build our scientific framework.

If P=0 then P=NP too.
Mathematics = overcomplicating things.

Nice

P and NP are Problem Type sets, not variables.

The whole problem is about either P = NP (All NP problems have the potential to be solved with P algorithms as well) or P =/= NP being true (Not all NP problems have the potential to be solved with P algorithms)

P = Set of problems solved in polynomial complexity. O(n^2) for example.
NP = Set of problems not solved in polynomial time. Exponential time complexities for example O(2^n).

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Also pic related.

You are fucking retarded and you cant prove I am wrong in any way.

What I said about logical systems is correct. Take your gibberish science fiction AKA computer science on your way out.

Well what if [math]P=0[/math]? That's the real question here, and your calculations don't work in that case.

see

But wait mate, what if:
P = 0

Then the relation a=b holds. Its reflexive, afterall.

0 = 0.

Noice mate, and the conclusion?

>Take your gibberish science fiction AKA computer science on your way out.
This.
LMAO CS brainlets they give me cancer.

But why the profanity mate?

Holy cow you're right. I've never thought of it like this.

Left as an exercise for the reader.

this lmao c""s"" tards when will they learn

This so much

That's Field's medal material right there. Thank you, user, through this post I rediscovered the true meaning of math.

>wants to meme
>fucks up this bad on something that simple
Never change, Veeky Forums.

CS-lets BTFO

People who make this joke should be executed.

> You are fucking retarded and you cant prove I am wrong in any way.
You gave the right answer to the wrong question.

> theory of complexity
> CS
You nigger do realize there are more parties than just CSists who are interested in Turing machines, right?

>NP = Set of problems not solved in polynomial time
Not exactly. NP problems are not solved but verified in polynomial time. Finding a solution is difficult, but given a candidate solution, determining if it's a solution or not is easy. For example, given a path on a graph you can easily tell if it's a Hamiltonian path, but given just the graph it's difficult to generate a Hamiltonian path if it exists.

P vs NP is a computer science problem. Not a maths problem. Any usage of higher maths awards zero points. Infinite sums would easily define P[math]\neq[/math]NP when the computer attempts to do infinite work returning absolute insolvability. This does not suffice for an answer to the problem though, since higher math is brain damaged garbage without practical applications short of being modified by computer scientists, therefore mathlets need not apply.

>Autists here will still respond seriously to old af b8

THIS. Computer science fags BTFO!

You Guys Were Missing This Image.

>Pic Ralted, It's My Wife.

> Autists這裡仍然會認真應對老AF B8

...

symbol versus data: data is a series of symbols, while information occurs when the symbols are used to refer to something.

>CS cant do math

BTFO how CSfags will even recover?

Thanks for correcting me user.
:-)

Computers Cucks BTFO

You're mistaken. N is an operator, like Nx = 3x^2. The problem is that no one knows which operator it actually is, so we don't know how to find the roots of the equation NP - P = 0.

How will computer "scientists" ever recover?

The only thing I can add to the previous correction is:

NP stands for "Nondeterministic Polynomial Time". The problems in that set can be solved in polynomial time on a nondeterministic turing machine. Such a machine probably can't be built, but it can be discussed theoretically. Imagine that a computer could magically guess the right way to go in a maze 100% of the time and you'll have a pretty good analogy for their capabilities.

Is there any hope at this point for CS cucks? lmao

Literal fiction.

The anti-CS hate in this thread is hilariously disappointing. This is a true theoretical CS concept, one of the most important mathematical questions of our time, and you're all just pretending like it's not real and serious. Sorry none of you have studied CS to the degree required to understand what the problem is asking.

I kek'd

Well to be honest there is only one person here. Replying to his own comment.
The anti-CS meme here on sci cooled down quite a lot I think.

t. cslet