|
|
Re: Seeking an algorithm
Posted:
Oct 1, 2011 8:27 AM
|
|
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:45:48 +0100, Peter Percival
<peterxpercival@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Given a finite set of numbers [...]
Thank you for all replies.
My (as opposed to the) problem with the two piles of books was actually a
multiset problem rather than a set problem, but I forgot that when I
"mathematicized" it. Never mind, it seems there is not much difference
between the two.
So the problem is hard (in a sense that can be made precise, and that I
still need to read up on); but is it unavoidably hard? By that I mean, is
it just that no better-than-exponential-time algorithm has been found, or
is it that there is none to be found? I am aware that there are problems
that are intrinsically unsolvable (halting problem, for example), but are
there any that are provably intrinsically difficult?
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
|
|
