I don't go to college. I dropped out. I work on an oil rig. I am still right. Does this bother you?
I have repeatedly said that the challenge is solvable via disproving it, but you repeatedly asserted that the efficient algorithm solution was possible (it might not be) and that trying to disprove it was a waste of time that would get you absolutely nowhere.
If Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem is correct (which it generally is regarded to be), it's possible that P != NP is true, but not provable. If P does equal to NP, so there IS an algorithm that can solve an NP complete problem in polynomial time, you can definitely find it, with enough time. However, you also have to prove that this characteristic of the algorithm is true, which, again, may not be possible.
And even IF proving it is theoretically possible, doing so could take longer than the lifetime of the universe.
I love how you always write whatever is on your mind, don't stop. Just accept/admit it when you were wrong. Everyone's wrong all the time, most people just keep their wrong opinions to themselves, normally.
deletedabout 7 years
Why don't you search the phrase "I do not understand computer science" in the forum search bar and see how many times it comes up from me in this thread.
I would sincerely bet 100 dollars, without glancing back, that I have said it a literal nine times.
deletedabout 7 years
I do not understand computer science, nor have I commented on computer science. I have no opinion, no clue, and no f.uck to give about the intricacies of computer science.
The challenge is possible, according to every single paper on the subject. The challenge is to prove or disprove it.
If you think that you, as an undergraduate with a community college origin story, have proved that the challenge is impossible, that's f.ucking hilarious and great.
Let's take your comments, and submit them to academic journals, and see what they have to say to you.
I will literally take your comments here and submit them to numerous academic journals as a paper just so I can read you the rejection letters, if you permit it.
And that is not what you said then, and you haven't admitted that ever, and instead have just launched into this pathetic rant about how shady was just trying to flaunt his CS knowledge when he's actually mature enough to not care that much about what online user Recividism thinks of his intelligence.
deletedabout 7 years
My god man, I have said at least ten separate times that I do not understand computer science and that whatever you have to say about the efficiency of the algorithm is correct.
What I am saying is that the challenge is possible, which it is, which is why there is a million dollar prize for it, which isn't going to go to some kid like you who gives up on it after 90 seconds because it's too hard any damn way.
This appeal to authority doesn't work when you don't know what the authority thinks in the first place.
Me/shady12 do and are telling you what the authority thinks and you can't even stand being wrong about that.
deletedabout 7 years
Dude I've posted hundreds of pages about how I miss my ex-girlfriend on this website, and I'm quintuple posting about how you are a re.tard
None of this is likable or conducive to preserving some sort of image. The only point of this is to make you feel bad for thinking that you are an authority on a problem posed by doctors from the Clayton Math Institute when you don't have a degree, because you aren't.
...But solving it positively by finding an efficient algorithm might very well be impossible, and most of the mathematical community expects this to be the case even if though they haven't ruled it out.
deletedabout 7 years
lmaooauhdhahahahaha
deletedabout 7 years
Just because you started your education at community college and gave up on it after looking at it for 90 seconds, does not in fact mean that leading experts in the field have.
Well, if you again look at that string of posts, it's again shady saying that finding an efficient algorithm could be impossible, and clearly what you were responding to.
You want to try and pretend like you knew that the challenge could be completed that way, sure, but we both know you didn't, and are just backpedaling harder and harder to save your oh-so-fragile image on an internet site.
deletedabout 7 years
The million dollar challenge isn't impossible you veritable f.ucking r.etard lol.
That's why there are people with doctorates trying to solve it as we speak, who didn't start at community college or give up after looking at it for 90 seconds.
What an expert you are. A real authority.
deletedabout 7 years
12345
deletedabout 7 years
I'm sorry Tatami, you're right, you're an expert.
I'm going to take your comments in this thread and submit it to Plos One, let's see if they accept it. What credentials do you have that I can cite?
I made it very obvious exactly what post I was talking about, so you acting like I didn't make it clear which is hilarious.
deletedabout 7 years
What is completely wrong, Tatami? That it is possible to solve the challenge one way or the other, according to every person with a doctorate who has commented on it?
Is it wrong to say that it is possible to complete a challenge?
Ah, but I digress. All of the world's greatest puzzles have been solved by community college kids like you. You're an authority, right?
This is the first main account I've had, ever, that's posted less than 57%, and it's at 55%, so ?
deletedabout 7 years
Oh the quote I never read because I don't understand computer science? Actually I didn't read it to respond to you god damned clown.
deletedabout 7 years
It doesn't at all surprise me that the guy who has spent the past 7 years with a sub-50 win rate still bragging about how he is the best can't read analytically.
Maybe those things are related. I bet you would bomb the f.uck out of the LSAT
If that is what you meant, that is not at all what you said. What you said was that a solution to the million dollar challenge via solving the N queens problem is certainly possible.
Your post in that quote is the one that we've been discussing this entire time, and yes, came before I said anything. If you look back on Page 6, at the very top there, you'll see the quote from shady12 that you were replying to.
You later claimed that I was quoting out of context and across different strings of posting, and this is false.
