|
JewKiller 3000 posted:people "knew" that fermat's last theorem was true because it's a simple calculation that you can test for many numbers to see a pattern. if you run a program to do that for a long time and see that it's always true, you have pretty strong evidence to believe the conjecture. that's not a general proof, because really big numbers can and do change the result unexpectedly. but even if you're satisfied with the unproven belief, you don't really know why it's true, you just found a pattern and declared it a law, you haven't really understood the nature of the universe any better. the ultimate proof of fermat's last theorem linked different fields of math together in previously unseen ways, and those discoveries will have far more lasting value to mathematics than simply a definitive answer to fermat's conjecture  this is excellent stuff. you should write a book
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:31 |
|
|
id read a book by jew killer 3000
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Stymie posted:there was an engineer at hp a few years ago who produced a proof that p=np but it was quickly hushed up because it basically would have destroyed the computer touching industry Agreed, also my uncle came up with a special carburetor in his garage in the 70's that got 100Mpg, but it would have destroyed the entire petroleum industry so it was stolen from him and then he was put in an insane asylum. A Pinball Wizard posted:it's in the cia headquarters vault, hanging out with the cold fusion reactor and the carburetor that gets 100mi/gal This was the carburetor my uncle invented. ate shit on live tv fucked around with this message at 04:03 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Agreed, also my uncle came up with a special carburetor in his garage in the 70's that got 100Mpg, but it would have destroyed the entire petroleum industry so it was stolen from him and then he was put in an insane asylum. i have a carburetor that gets 100mpg it's called a keihin CV 3D and it's mounted my honda cl350 motorcycle
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:i have a carburetor that gets 100mpg it's called a keihin CV 3D and it's mounted my honda cl350 motorcycle Yea but he put it on his 1979 Corvette and then drove to Detroit from Texas without stopping for gas.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
i was wrong about the hp engineer, his proof was p != np and was quickly debunked still, there is plenty of opposition to actually researching the problem because an entire fraudulent industry rides on one of the solutions being correct
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:id read a book by jew killer 3000 mein kampfjecture that p=np
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
i went from that survey article someone linked to a book about quantum mechanics from the perspective of computation theory halp
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
For a given NP problem there are algorithms that are faster than others. One might wonder if the algorithms could be improved to the point that they run in polynomial time. It's like asking "Can a human run 100 meters in under 8 seconds?" One might think it could be possible if they look at the world record times and see that they are improving over the years.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
qkkl posted:For a given NP problem there are algorithms that are faster than others. One might wonder if the algorithms could be improved to the point that they run in polynomial time. It's like asking "Can a human run 100 meters in under 8 seconds?" One might think it could be possible if they look at the world record times and see that they are improving over the years. it's not really how fast, more that the answer keeps on needing to be checked until correct, i.e. sorting needs to be checked. there's algorithms, but it's not as simple as applying an equation and having it spit out an answer immediately
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:donald trump thinks p is np
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:donald trump thinks p is np this is the only good p = np joke i've ever read
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
more like no one should expect np to be efficiently solvable, but it could be that there exists some monstrous, but still polynomial, bound for those problems (e.g. it turns out that satisfiability is solvable in time n^100), which would rather mean the end for the polynomial hierarchy as a way of separating these things than it would mean that np-complete problems can be efficiently solved
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:more like no one should expect np to be efficiently solvable, but it could be that there exists some monstrous, but still polynomial, bound for those problems (e.g. it turns out that satisfiability is solvable in time n^100), which would rather mean the end for the polynomial hierarchy as a way of separating these things than it would mean that np-complete problems can be efficiently solved eat my balls
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
what if we made a computer so vast and efficient, it could simulate the entire universe faster than the universe itself existed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
it is a legit philosophical conundrum why all "natural" problems tend to either be np (or worse), or n^c for very small integers c. is the small exponents inherent in what we view as natural, or is it that there exists families of stronger algorithms which we have difficulty discovering by intuitive means? primality testing surprisingly being in p, with a running time of O(n^12) (later reduced to O(n^6) granted) is one of the odd ones out, but may be the first of something bigger (having only been figured out in 2002)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
1 million dollars says you can't prove it, OP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:what if we made a computer so vast and efficient, it could simulate the entire universe faster than the universe itself existed? eventually the cosmological constant expanding the universe would mean you'd lose track of your memory. it would recede from you faster than the speed of light eventually.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:what if we made a computer so vast and efficient, it could simulate the entire universe faster than the universe itself existed? information theory would show up and say "no" and then it wouldn't work
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:eventually the cosmological constant expanding the universe would mean you'd lose track of your memory. it would recede from you faster than the speed of light eventually. this is pretty cool to think aboot
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:this is pretty cool to think aboot You don't need to simulate the entire universe, just the parts that contain the math problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:what if we made a computer so vast and efficient, it could simulate the entire universe faster than the universe itself existed? i think you could if you hack elementary particles and make more efficient ones, way better than "god's" lovely implementation
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
you could make a computer that simulates the universe on an extremely slow level compared with the current universe, but the observers inside the simulation would perceive as normal speed, just like we do in our simulated universe
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i think you could if you hack elementary particles and make more efficient ones, way better than "god's" lovely implementation please see permutation city by greg egan
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i think you could if you hack elementary particles and make more efficient ones, way better than "god's" lovely implementation Speaking of this: what's the current best guess as to whether photosynthesis is (a) extremely optimized and pushing the limits of efficiency after billions of years of evolution, or (b) a stupid nature hack full of problems and dumb pathways and scientists will soon be able to make their own better version that lets us have bright green cars that run forever on sunlight and water
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
I'll bet modern PVs are already more efficient than plant based photosynthesis
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Speaking of this: what's the current best guess as to whether photosynthesis is (a) extremely optimized and pushing the limits of efficiency after billions of years of evolution, or (b) a stupid nature hack full of problems and dumb pathways and scientists will soon be able to make their own better version that lets us have bright green cars that run forever on sunlight and water the same process that decided "gently caress it let's just oxidize water" and pulled it off is the one that brought us "whoops i'm doing photorespiration now" so it's both
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Speaking of this: what's the current best guess as to whether photosynthesis is (a) extremely optimized and pushing the limits of efficiency after billions of years of evolution, or (b) a stupid nature hack full of problems and dumb pathways and scientists will soon be able to make their own better version that lets us have bright green cars that run forever on sunlight and water i can tell you this: photosynthesis REALLY hates the color green for some reason and throws that poo poo out the window back into our eyes for us to see
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:I'll bet modern PVs are already more efficient than plant based photosynthesis they aren't, but getting better
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i can tell you this: photosynthesis REALLY hates the color green for some reason and throws that poo poo out the window back into our eyes for us to see lol yeah whats up w/ that
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:they aren't, but getting better sugarcane is like 8%, which is why brazil will be our liquid fuel overlords .
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Bloody posted:lol yeah whats up w/ that Plants are too intelligent to go through a life-long goth phase.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
There are plants with leaves that aren't green, folks. Its just that the green-reflecting kind of clorphyll is apparently more competitive or at least just ended up more common
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 11:39
|
|
|
here is a video that i linked my non-maths friend to explain p and np https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX40hbAHx3s
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:donald trump thinks p is np
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:There are plants with leaves that aren't green, folks. Its just that the green-reflecting kind of clorphyll is apparently more competitive or at least just ended up more common not many, and the leaves that aren't green are considered loving nerds
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
i don't know if i like the video.. he mentions sorting. checking sorting can be done in polynomial time, but actually sorting - isn't that np?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i don't know if i like the video.. he mentions sorting. checking sorting can be done in polynomial time, but actually sorting - isn't that np? ....well, if the ordering isn't required to be transitive i guess? but mostly no
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:i don't know if i like the video.. he mentions sorting. checking sorting can be done in polynomial time, but actually sorting - isn't that np? didnt watch the video, but sorting is n log n which is better than most polynomials
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:31 |
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:not many, and the leaves that aren't green are considered loving nerds Apparently the chlorophyll variant those plants have isn't as efficient as the green-reflecting kind for the sun's particular emissions
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 16:48
|
|