2 ms·
Theoretical CS is usually not thought of as an experimental or empirical field. When a paper in that field claims "X does not exist", this has to mean that the
by a3_nm 11y ago
Theoretical CS is usually not thought of as an experimental or empirical field. When a paper in that field claims "X does not exist", this has to mean that the inexistence of X was proven, not that a body of empirical knowledge against the existence of X has been collected. By contrast, such things are called "plausibility arguments", "heuristics", etc.
There is such a thing as experimental truth, but it applies to experimental fields, and theoretical CS is usually not thought as one of them. I still think it is misleading to claim that the inexistence of something has been proven if it is conditional to another hypothesis.
- brudgers 11y agoComputer scientists behave as if P!=NP, and Donald Knuth will send a check to anyone who comes up with a polynomial time general solution to 3-sat. Or to put it another way, P!=NP is a de facto if not de jure axiom of theoretical computer science. And the burden of justification is on anyone whose conclusions are not premised on P!=NP just as it is a biologist who takes issue with evolution by saying "it's only a theory."