
Re: P=NP Proof Published at CERN
Posted:
May 9, 2009 12:10 PM


On May 9, 2:31 am, Denis Feldmann <denis.feldmann.sanss...@neuf.fr> wrote: > Martin Musatov a écrit : > > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox proof P=NP has been > > published on CERN preprints. > > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1ln5758210922353419396... > > > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen > > it. > > > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like > > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted DearSci.Math I am just going to answer all up here to make it easy: ****Denis: I understand the effort required to keep a nice garden, so I apologize if I trampled your shrubs. Re: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ecritcharter.html, though I hope you're right re: neat results, Millenium Prize money, and the ladies! (though my heart is really with only one) ****victor_meldrew_666@yahoo.co.uk: I like a fool misspelled "orthodox". While you share the same first name with my father I can only pray the reason the "666" is there because 2/3 didn't fit. Re: "Does that mean it's bogus?" ***You tell me: ***If you have feedback, I very much encourage, welcome, thank and appreciate. ***If anyone is attempting to disprove undecidability of P==NP please email me. *A N Niel: the actual culprit believe it or not was Google docs uploading a .txt file converting to .pdf which created the in and out character/equations on the left side of the page. The vertical numbering appeared when I attempted to upload a proof a manuscript system. It looked very sturdy and wellenforced so I tried to throw it up against the CERN server and see if it woulds stick and it did. I then began to experiment with other "geometric" databases: A first example of which can be found here: *http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164207/export/xm note: no missing "L" there... and: *http://documents.cern.ch/photo/phototsic/icondfbx2009001.gif a neat picture I used in developing my theory. My interests began in geometry and then shifted into numerical analysis and prime numbers so P==NP was my way to reconcile all of this. When I saw the error Google Docs generated I began to wonder if we could define functions pertaining to numerical analysis not by their presence but by their absence, and more specifically the geometry of the space that makes up that absence. After all as complicated as numbers can be we only have 10 plus a zero. In the end this was the shape, or an example of it in binary to which I was able to parse two sets of data readable and absent from one document: ******************************************************************************************** NOTE: The Google Docs parsing began generating content vertically as it ran the equations I had prepared in a Microsoft Word file, then ctl +c, ctl+v into .txt file. IT RAN RIGHT THROUGH THE REFERENCES BEFORE SEALING OFF THE SOLUTION JUST THIS SIDE OF INFINITY it was pretty neat: ********************************************************************************************* So indeed my proof stands correct and I hope it makes its way over to Mr. Cook for his comments;! ********************************************************************************************* Here is a sample parsing from a "Polynomial Time Algorithm" MARTIN M. MUSATOV: m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net An Open Address to Mr. Stephen A. Cook: sacook [at] cs [dot] toronto [dot] edu STATEMENT OF THE SOLUTION This solution to P versus NP explains how every language accepted by some non deterministic algorithm in polynomial time can be accepted by some (deterministic) algorithm in polynomial time. To define the solution it is formally it is necessary to observe the model of a computer, or Turing machine and process information in realtime as it is received as a computable function or linear stream. By this declaration, formally, the class P contains the indecision problems P = . ... . N. ... . P From this point, we can continue the expansion: The area of a circle [2]: . ..=....2 The binomial theorem [3]: ..+.. ..= .. .. .......... .. ..=0 Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];. 1+.. ..=1+ .... 1! + .. ..1 ..22! +. Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:. .. .. =..0+ ....cos ...... .. +....sin ...... .. 8 ..=1 The Pythagorean Formula [6]:. ..2+..2=..2 1 Arfken, G. "Special Coordinate SystemsRectangular Cartesian Coordinates." §2.3 in Mathematical Methods for Physicists, 3rd ed. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, pp. 9495, 1985. 2 Richmond, Bettina (19990112). "Area of a Circle". Western Kentucky University. Retrieved on 20071104. 3Amulya Kumar Bag. Binomial Theorem in Ancient India. Indian J.History Sci.,1:6874,1966. 4 "Neither Newton nor Leibniz  The PreHistory of Calculus and Celestial Mechanics in Medieval Kerala". MAT 314. Canisius College. Retrieved on 20060709. 5William E. Boyce and Richard C. DiPrima, Elementary Differential Equations and Boundary Value Problems, Eighth edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey, 2005. ISBN 0471433381 6Bell, John L., The Art of the Intelligible: An Elementary Survey of Mathematics in its Conceptual Development, Kluwer, 1999. ISBN 079235972 0. 7Heaton, H. (1896) A Method of Solving Quadratic Equations, American Mathematical Monthly 3(10), 236?237. Through the Quadratic Equation [7]:. ..= ..± ..24.... 2.. Page 2 of 3 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/imamat Manuscripts submitted to (i)The IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics(/i) To be succeed by a modified Taylor Series Expansion [8];. ....=1+ .. 1! + ..22! + ..33! +.,8<..<8 ? > > peerreviewed published proof building on this basic result. > > Dont worry : if you have really proved P=NP, any working program solving > any NPcomplete problem in polynomial time will be enough to bring you > fame, the Clay prize money, and perhaps even chicks... > > > > > Thank you, > > > Martin Musatov > > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net. > >

