May I forumulate Lewis' first law: As a discussion amoungst computer scientists continues the propability of the P != NP problem being mentioned tends to to 1.
Or was this a law already? It seems familliar. -Lodewijk "Lewis" André de la Porte On May 29, 2011 4:25 AM, "Nathan Loofbourrow" <njl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM, James A. Donald <jam...@echeque.com> wrote: > >> On 28/05/11 03:37, James A. Donald wrote: >> >>> What can be said is that the class of problems soluble by a quantum >>>> computer >>>> is larger than the class of problems soluble by a classical computer. >>>> >>> >> On 2011-05-29 9:01 AM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: >> >>> No, it can't: >>> >>> - for idealized quantum and classical computers (with unbounded memory >>> running for unbounded time), those classes are identical. >>> >>> - for quantum and classical computers that can be practically built at >>> any >>> point in time, and with a limit on the time to find a solution, it >>> certainly isn't clear that the class of problems soluble by quantum >>> computers will be larger (ever). That depends on how big and fast you >>> can make quantum computers and classical computers. >>> >> >> What can be said is that the class of problems soluble by a quantum >> computer with a polynomially large number of components in polynomial time >> is larger than the class of problems soluble by a classical computer with a >> polynomially large number of components in polynomial time. > > > Wait, was P!=NP proven and I missed it? I thought it was merely an assertion > with overwhelming evidence, but no formal proof. > > n
_______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
