Martin Musatov wrote: David Bernier wrote: > scribe...@yahoo.com wrote: > [...] > > > community. But perhaps he is trying to see things a bit differently > > and is just not getting the feedback he needs, so he is throwing > > tantrums apparently across USENET. > > > > Like I said before, I am just trying to do right by this person who > > contacted me, and seemed to be a decent person with a genuine interest > > in mathematics. He was very respectful. > > > > Alas, I am at a loss on what specific feedback to give him on his > > paper as though I am a professor of Mathematics, Computer Science is > > not my specialty. > > > > I told him I would try to get him some feedback on the equations on > > page 3. Would any of you be so kind to help me? > > > > Here is the paper: http://MeAmI.org/pversusnp.pdf > > > > I do thank you for your time. > > > > Good day, > > > > Professor X > > This is what there is at the bottom of page 3: > > << Conclusion: Binary revisions are allowed given the above formulas. >> > > So I don't understand the proposed solution for the "P = NP" > problem. > > David Bernier
P can be equal to N and not P when it is in brackets vs. parantheses. The dots ib the equation in "P = [dots] <i>N</i> (dots) <i>P</i>. The difference between the brackets and the paranthesis represents a margin of time in computation. The dots present in the paper (I am not able to render them here, but they are in the .pdf file) represent a non-deterministic symbolic means of representing language. Thank you for your respone. The conclusion means traditional characters and symbols are not ideal for binary computation. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list