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,


Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to