|
|
Re: P=NP Proof Published at CERN
Posted:
May 9, 2009 5:05 PM
|
|
On May 9, 12:15 pm, Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
<mariano.suarezalva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
>
> >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
>
> > 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
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> on.
> It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> on.
>
> -- m
familiar with the Internet...a huge+
re: --m: Facts in Proof. Evidence. Evaluation of Evidence, (that is
very, very, thoughtful and patience of you to react with such
kindness, care, insight, and attention to detail even when it is
sometimes painfully obvious the secret missing logical component
needed to definitively refute any proof: "P=/=NP" and counter it with
shrewd humanitarian based logic of ages grounded as much in science
and cold physical studies as it is in morality).
*In polynomial time responses can be handled efficiently if the
programmer considers possibilities before they occur. Good point, just
because something you were prepared for occurs does not mean you are
the cause.--Martin Musatov Critique my method to this statement as it
satisfies an axiom to prove P==NP.
*Critique my approach in Polynomial time to what we need to get P==NP
published to claim:
The Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI) of Cambridge, Massachusetts has
named seven "Millennium Prize Problems." The Scientific Advisory Board
of CMI (SAB) selected these problems, focusing on important classic
questions that have resisted solution over the years. The Board of
Directors of CMI designated a $7 million prize fund for the solution
to these problems, with $1 million allocated to each. The Directors of
CMI, and no other persons or body, have the authority to authorize
payment from this fund or to modify or interpret these stipulations.
The Board of Directors of CMI makes all mathematical decisions for
CMI, upon the recommendation of its SAB.
The SAB of CMI will consider a proposed solution to a Millennium Prize
Problem if it is a complete mathematical solution to one of the
problems. (In the case that someone discovers a mathematical
counterexample, rather than a proof, the question will be considered
separately as described below.) A proposed solution to one of the
Millennium Prize Problems may not be submitted directly to CMI for
consideration.
Before consideration, a proposed solution must be published in a
refereed mathematics publication of worldwide repute (or such other
form as the SAB shall determine qualifies), and it must also have
general acceptance in the mathematics community two years after.
Following this two-year waiting period, the SAB will decide whether a
solution merits detailed consideration. In the affirmative case, the
SAB will constitute a special advisory committee, which will include
(a) at least one SAB member and (b) at least two non-SAB members who
are experts in the area of the problem. The SAB will seek advice to
determine potential non-SAB members who are internationally-recognized
mathematical experts in the area of the problem. As part of this
procedure, each component of a proposed solution under consideration
shall be verified by one or more members of this special advisory
committee.
The special advisory committee will report within a reasonable time to
the SAB. Based on this report and possible further investigation, the
SAB will make a recommendation to the Directors. The SAB may recommend
the award of a prize to one person. The SAB may recommend that a
particular prize be divided among multiple solvers of a problem or
their heirs. The SAB will pay special attention to the question of
whether a prize solution depends crucially on insights published prior
to the solution under consideration. The SAB may (but need not)
recommend recognition of such prior work in the prize citation, and it
may (but need not) recommend the inclusion of the author of prior work
in the award.
If the SAB cannot come to a clear decision about the correctness of a
solution to a problem, its attribution, or the appropriateness of an
award, the SAB may recommend that no prize be awarded for a particular
problem. If new information comes to light, the SAB may (but will not
necessarily) reconsider a negative decision to recommend a prize for a
proposed solution, but only after an additional two-year waiting
period following the time that the new information comes to light. The
SAB has the sole authority to make recommendations to the Directors of
the CMI concerning the appropriateness of any award and the validity
of any claim to the CMI Millennium Prize.
In the case of the P versus NP problem and the Navier-Stokes problem,
the SAB will consider the award of the Millennium Prize for deciding
the question in either direction. In the case of the other problems if
a counterexample is proposed, the SAB will consider this
counterexample after publication and the same two-year waiting period
as for a proposed solution will apply. If, in the opinion of the SAB,
the counterexample effectively resolves the problem then the SAB may
recommend the award of the Prize. If the counterexample shows that the
original problem survives after reformulation or elimination of some
special case, then the SAB may recommend that a small prize be awarded
to the author. The money for this prize will not be taken from the
Millennium Prize Problem fund, but from other CMI funds.
Any person who is not a disqualified person (as that term is defined
in section 4946 of the Internal Revenue Code) in connection with the
Institute, or a then serving member of the SAB, may receive the
Millennium Prize.
All decision-making procedures concerning the CMI Millennium Prize
Problems are private. This includes the deliberations or
recommendations of any person or persons CMI has used to obtain advice
on this question. No records of these deliberations or related
correspondence may be made public without the prior approval of the
Directors, the SAB, and all other living persons involved, unless
fifty years time have elapsed after the event in question.
Please send inquiries regarding the Millennium Prize Problems to
prize.problems@claymath.org.
Revision of January 19, 2005
* History
* Press statement
* Press reaction
* Nature article
* Publication Guidelines
Return to top
--Also, and this is important: if there is anything you see a
vulnerability in my proof that makes it look like what I said is not
true, or needs clarifying, perhaps maybe to people who are always nay
saying, pointing a finger and exclaiming, "You're wrong, here's why!",
please tell me: "For this to be true, this has to be true." "You have
accomplished this, so the next step is to do this."
Here are M.I.T.'s accessibility report card: (these are for critiques
of proof and ongoing discovery utilizes them). I have a little niece
who is hearing impaired and she is my absolute angel. So this is an
important one to me.
Navigation
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Current location within the site is shown clearly
Link to the site's main page is clearly identified
Major/important parts of the site are directly accessible from the
main page
Site map is provided for a large, complex site
Easy to use Search function is provided, as needed
Functionality
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Site accommodates novice to expert users
Functions are clearly labeled
Essential functions are available without leaving the site
Plug-ins are used only if they add value
User Control
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Site reflects user's workflow
User can cancel any operation
Clear exit point is provided on every page
Per-page size is less than 50K, to accommodate slow connections
All appropriate browsers are supported
Language and Content
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Important information and tasks are given prominence
Information of low relevance or rarely used information is not
included
Related information or tasks are grouped:
- on the same page or menu
- in the same area within a page
Language is simple, without jargon
Paragraphs are brief
Links are concise, expressive, and visible--not buried in text
Terms are defined
Online Help and User Guides
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Site is designed to require minimal help and instructions
Help and instructions, if needed, are easily accessible
System and User Feedback
Rating
Explanation for Rating
It is always clear what is happening on the site -- visual hints, etc.
Users can receive email feedback if necessary
Users can give feedback via email or a feedback form
Confirmation screen is provided for form submittal
All system feedback is timely
Users are informed if a plug-in or browser version is required
Each page includes a "last updated" date
Web Accessibility
W3C's Tools, Checklist, and Guidelines
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Site follows current web standards; HTML 4.0, Cascading Style Sheets
(CSS1)
Cascading Style Sheets are used for layout and style where possible
Images and animations
The attribute ALT= is used for images, animations, and other objects
Image maps
Site uses client-side map and text for hotspots
Multimedia
Site provides captioning and transcripts of audio and descriptions of
video
Web versions of PDF documents are provided
Link labels make sense when read out of context; site avoids such link
names as "click here"
Page organization
Accomplished with headings, lists, and consistent structure
Graphs and charts
Summaries are provided for graphs and charts, or the LONGDESC
attribute is used
Scripts, applets, & plug-ins
Alternative content is provided for scripts, applets, and plug-ins in
case these active features are inaccessible or unsupported
Frames
For frames pages, site includes the NOFRAMES option and meaningful
titles
Tables
Line-by-line reading of tables is sensible, and summaries are included
where possible
Validation
Site has been validated using the W3C's HTML Validation Service and
the Bobby Accessibility Checker
Site has been tested on a variety of platforms (UNIX, Windows, Mac)
and browsers (Netscape 3, 4, 6, 7; IE 5, 6; lynx)
Consistency
Rating
Explanation for Rating
The same word or phrase is used consistently to describe an item
Link reflects the title of the page to which it refers
Browser page title is meaningful and reflects main page heading
Error Prevention and Correction
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Users can rely on recognition, not memory, for successful use of the
site
Site tolerates a reasonable variety of user actions
Site provides concise instructions for user actions, including entry
format
Error messages are visible, not hidden
Error messages are in plain language
Error messages describe actions to remedy a problem
Error messages provide a clear exit point
Error messages provide contact details for assistance
Architectural and Visual Clarity
Rating
Explanation for Rating
Site is organized from the user's perspective
Site is easily scannable for organization and meaning
Site design and layout is straightforward and concise
Site design and layout are redundant only when required for user
productivity
White space is sufficient; pages are not too dense
Unnecessary animation is avoided
Colors used for visited and unvisited links are easily seen and
understood
Bold and italic text is used sparingly
Come to me with challenges and solutions which are reproducible to
stride towards instead of loathing disproofs based on the certainty of
Quantum Computers based largely on opinions of those not
Also if you think this thing is ready please critique my approach to
contacting/involving Stephen Arthur Cook in this proof. I am making
plans to contact other people who would like to join the "Cause for
Truth!" P==NP campaign, so any critical comments to energize the
troops. (oh, in case I forget, here is: sacook [at] cs [dot] toronto
[dot] edu.
MARTIN M. MUSATOV: m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net
|
|
