I don't think Recidivism could handle another layer despite it just making this whole thing more funny.
deletedabout 7 years
If you know that it MAY BE impossible, even that it is LIKELY to be impossible, you are welcome to call the challenge improbable, which it is.
I'm only speaking in FACTS.
You are not allowed to call it impossible. Also I really don't care to discuss this with you, I basically just think that you want to talk about computer science. Go right ahead.
Your argument would work if that was what you said, but you instead told shady that finding an efficient algorithm and solving the challenge that way is "very possible" and again that is likely untrue.
What's funny is that this is actually the only thing I've been trying to tell you you're wrong about.
deletedabout 7 years
That's fine, we can include that. But it also has to include the assertion you made that the challenge is not possible, which you definitely said in clear terms. In fact, that must be the title.
We can literally sit down and put this together. Either you're going to be a college dropout published in a mathematics journal, or you're going to realize just how out of your league you are in even trying to make an assertion like that.
"Current mathematical opinion on the P ?= NP problem is that P does not equal NP, making finding a polynomial time solution for NP problems impossible if they are correct.[1]"
A fact being "wrong". To be "wrong", it first has to be an opinion.
deletedabout 7 years
Well my factual statement that the million dollar challenge is possible, which is completed when the CS hypothesis or whatever-the-f.uck is proven OR proven wrong, cannot possibly be wrong by virtue of it being a factual statement and not an opinion.
Actually, you could send a correct proof and they still wouldn't do that.
The Clay Math Institute does not directly review potential solutions. (Not that I ever proposed anything resembling that)
deletedabout 7 years
We're going to teach you the difference between likely and certain, improbable and impossible, and you'll be a better man for it.
deletedabout 7 years
Here I am, belittling someone for thinking that Clayton Math's challenge cannot be solved, without even understanding the thing you are accusing me of believing.
deletedabout 7 years
Great,
I'm going to compile, word for word without any of my opinions, your posts in this thread into an actual formatted paper titled "Proof that Clayton Math's One Million Dollar Challenge Cannot be Completed" and then I'm going to send you the rejection letter.
I'll be doing you a favor. We're going to knock you down a peg now before this "I'm a genius who couldn't even obtain a bachelor's degree" fantasy of yours gets you in real trouble.
Here you are, belittling shady for thinking that someone should try to prove it imossible, which most of CS theorists and the Clay Math Institute both think is more likely to happen, and would win the challenge.
You clearly didn't know the nature of the challenge and thought that a positive solution was what all the scientists thought. Just admit that, dude.
Me saying "An efficient algorithm is likely impossible, according to current CS theorist opinion" makes no claims of my own. I was again the one who had to point out to you that the challenge not only accepts "Impossible" as a solution but expects it.
deletedabout 7 years
Okay dude. You clearly care about looking smart here. I don't mind, that's fine.
I'll be private messaging you the rejection letter, which is all that I care about.
Shady12 wanting to show off his college education was a lot more respectable to me than you purporting that, as a college dropout, you have magically figured out a source of major contention among mathematicians with doctorates.
I want you to understand how f.ucking ridiculous that is. That's all I want. I want YOU to understand, not anyone else.
Too bad this isn't what I said and I was the one who had to point it out to you to begin with that the finding an efficient solution could be impossible, and was the one who told you to begin with that proving such does qualify as a solution, because you didn't know that.
deletedabout 7 years
Dude I am probably one of the least liked people left on this website right now, I made a 100 page thread about how much I loved my cheating ex-girlfriend, the fact that you think I'm out to uphold some kind of imaginary reputation for being smart I probably don't even have is f.ucking hilarious.
Literally all I care about is that you said the million dollar challenge is impossible and then you wrote a big huge essay of irrelevant CS 101 to back up your point. All I want is for you to realize that, as a college dropout, the Clayton Math Institute and the rest of the educated world doesn't give a flying f.uck about your stupid opinions about how their challenge is not even possible.
If we send them in something saying "Peanut butter exists", and we get back a rejection, that statement must have been false. Peanut butter can't exist, the institute agrees.
Yes, because it is not an attempt at a solution, but is instead a sweeping statement as to the nature of the problem, which the institute wholeheatedly agrees with.
