jill_west
onlyfans
NP vs P my definitive opinion: P!=NP NP Complete = P(this i..
🕑 Added 2024-01-09 04:08:28 +0000 UTC NP vs P my definitive opinion: P!=NP NP Complete = P(this is because they are problems that we have been proved as solvable. the sets’ “distinction” will change as we solve more problems over time and make up new ones) P != NP(because NP is larger - NP doesn’t equal P because equal means the same, in this problem it seems to be treated more like inclusion this is wrong P cannot equal NP and NP includes P). What I meant by the square vs a rectangle entanglement/inclusion was that conflating two unrelated arguments muddies the waters and is not conducive to intelligent discussions. What I thought initially when using booleans however this was flawed. Again a semantics problem necessary for how we handle new and old problems, current theories don’t include future ones however futures theories NEED to include current(and old theories) in spirit. They must cover the same problem in a new and ingenious way that doesn’t forget the heart of the problem. In computer sciences knowing how to manage groups and their constituents are important. We do this with deduction and intuition and maths that allow our computers to work. With the “biological technology” of our brains we need to apply what we are able to understand. Meaning that technology should work for us. Working on this problems feels deeply romantic because of how much context and semantics matters to its solution. There are too many wrong ways to interpret what is being said and I hope I presented the problem in a clean and coherent manner. Anyways, red herrings aside, I think I’m right and hope you do too - like and share. See you guys like this message from a bottle and see y’all later 👋!
