3 ms·

I spent years working towards a solution, to prove P = NP. I was miserable, isolated and alone - because I was focused on mathematical symbols instead of the p

I spent years working towards a solution, to prove P = NP. I was miserable, isolated and alone - because I was focused on mathematical symbols instead of the people around me. When I started considering that P didn't equal NP, it was the same time that I started thinking about and seriously considering the idea that there was somethign more powerful about groups of people than a single intellect. A single turing machine is like a single mind; a quantum computer is like the thoughts of an entire society. If P = NP, it suggests that smartest guy in the room always wins. If P doesn't equal NP - it means a group can overpower a single smart person. There's a lot of ego in thinking the former.

1arity 11y ago
I think you found a solution to __your__ problem with P == NP, not a solution to that actual problem. You had a problem with working on this. You found a solution to that. I hear that. The solution you found that worked for you has no bearing on a solution of the problem you abandoned. They say perspective is 80 IQ points. Maybe no one has had the perspective that works on it yet? In any case, if you are going to be someone who solves P == NP, you need to also be someone capable of solving the "you as a person working on P == NP" problem, the meta problem. You got to take care of yourself, so you can take care of the problem. If you don't do one, how can you do the other? The video gamer can't run the marathon until he trains. Even if you have the brain for this, you can't do it until you can sustain your effort. It's like an elite sport.
- MarkPNeyer 11y ago
  i get that. and to be honest, i haven't ruled out the possibility that P = NP. i just think those who suspect it does have many strong reasons for suspecting it. but then, the michelson-morely experiment was also expected to succeed, and didn't...

1arity 11y ago

I think you found a solution to __your__ problem with P == NP, not a solution to that actual problem. You had a problem with working on this. You found a solution to that. I hear that. The solution you found that worked for you has no bearing on a solution of the problem you abandoned. They say perspective is 80 IQ points. Maybe no one has had the perspective that works on it yet? In any case, if you are going to be someone who solves P == NP, you need to also be someone capable of solving the "you as a person working on P == NP" problem, the meta problem. You got to take care of yourself, so you can take care of the problem. If you don't do one, how can you do the other? The video gamer can't run the marathon until he trains. Even if you have the brain for this, you can't do it until you can sustain your effort. It's like an elite sport.

MarkPNeyer 11y ago
i get that. and to be honest, i haven't ruled out the possibility that P = NP. i just think those who suspect it does have many strong reasons for suspecting it. but then, the michelson-morely experiment was also expected to succeed, and didn't...