Timeline for Should we consider $\mathsf{P} \neq \mathsf{NP}$ a law of nature?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 24, 2013 at 5:28 | comment | added | Thinniyam Srinivasan Ramanatha | I meant that if a mathematical proof of the statement is produced, no evidence from the physical world can disprove it. | |
| Dec 24, 2013 at 5:16 | comment | added | Thinniyam Srinivasan Ramanatha | @KyleJones Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying (probably because I don't know enough about BSS model). Could you give me a reference which explains this in more detail? | |
| Dec 23, 2013 at 18:17 | comment | added | Kyle Jones | Except that we know that if physical laws didn't prevent Blum–Shub–Smale machines from being created in our universe, P and NP would be equivalent. So the question is related to the physical world in that sense. | |
| Dec 23, 2013 at 3:31 | history | answered | Thinniyam Srinivasan Ramanatha | CC BY-SA 3.0 |