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.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Aug 28 2006 - 10:34:56 PDT