Le 27-août-06, à 12:43, Russell Standish a écrit :

> I recall reading this paper, and the followup entitled "The Random
> Oracle Hypothesis is False" by Chang et al.

Have you the reference? Do you know if Chang has found a math error, or 
a conceptual mishandling? I would be interested to know.

>> From recollection though, the claim was of superior algorithmic
> performance (ie solving NP problems in P time) rather than solving
> uncomputable problems.

I doubt this very much, but I will check and let you know,



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to