Should You Try To Solve P Vs NP? - Intro to Theoretical Computer Science

[julienarpin]

P probably equals NP because causality is irreducible and everything can be described as a chain of causes. Without a causal history, things can't exist in our universe. It's only that the symbols necessary to describe the universe in full fidelity require more memory than the universe can allocate to us that problems can seemingly exceed the scope of our grasp and be of NP hardness. Being able to navigate a simple grocery store is of NP hardness to a shopper without memory.

[abraruralam]

"We know the past but cannot control it. We control the future but cannot know it."- Claude Shannon.

The avalanche effect

Chaos

Causality

[factsheet]

It's pretty obvious that p is different than np, because this world is a cruel one that doesn't seem to want us to discover too much of it...
If p does equal np in a productive way, then every mathematical statement can be proved or disproved quickly by a classical computer... 🥺

[riverst-lawrence]

They always talk about computer scientist as if they are a special elite and no one else can find a solution to P vs NP but there is a lot of seasoned software developers with high I.Q. that can work to find an algorithm for P=NP and need almost nothing from computer science.

So, at lest one option is missing from the last question: When you should try to settle the P vs NP question ?

- You are a seasoned software developer with high I.Q. (>140). There is a problem that you encounter in your career and you badly need to solve it. You find that is related to P vs NP but it does not deter you, you are freshly retired so you can work on it as a hobby. If you health goes well you can spend a lot of years on it.

[drmadjdsadjadi]

It is better simply to try to prove that the problem itself belongs to the unprovable class of problems (or that it belongs to the provable class of problems). After all, if it is in the unprovable class, the entire problem is irrelevant. Only if it is in the provable class is a proof even worth pursuing at all. If it is the provable class, then get a quantum supercomputer to work on it and stop trying to do it yourself.

[bakedutah]

You missed an option for the quiz:

[ ] You’re drunk as a skunk; you have so little money left this month that you can’t afford anything but ramen for a late night snack; and you have just had yet another argument with your girlfriend(1) where she got mad at you for being such a geek and stormed out so that you are now thinking _”Huh! I’ll show_ *her* _when I win the prize money and she comes crawling back!”._

(1) OK, OK, fine. She’s a girl, and she is (at least kind of) a friend; but let’s face it, for most of us, if we’re thinking about trying to solve P vs NP then we almost certainly don’t have an actual _girlfriend!_ 🥴

[gmaf]

From the work I've personally done, that I one day may share with the world if I can bring myself to destroy encryption and implode the internet, I can tell you that P kinda equals NP. It all depends on how complex the solution. Just like we know some infinities are bigger than others, P=NP to a limit.

[venuvenu]

can p=np if i have infinite computation power?

[maxc]

Pnly option 3 - that's how you get to option 4. haha

[alanliang]

if you have the criteria’s at the end why would u watch the video lmao

[alexandergames]

P doesn't equal np, np equals p.

[unknvvnmystery]

P=np
P= any number
N=1
I'm 13 and I figured it out

[reinerczerwinski]

If you want to try to settle P vs. NP it is enougth to have a briliant inside. But than you have to formulate a proof. If you can form this idea into a consistent and sound proof then you will know, that it has not been tried before.

[BongelaMnguni]

I can't believe people have been struggling to solve such a simple problem.

P=NP
P-NP=0
(1-N)P=0
1-N = 0 or P= 0
Therefore, P=NP when N=1 or P=0.

where can I claim my $1 Million?

[maxlooter]

Searching this if it's true after watching elementary