3 ms·

Knuth played a joke and "announced" iTeX. http://search.twitter.com/search?q=knuth http://search.twitter.com/search?q=knuth

Tichy 16y ago
The problem is, now if he really proves P=NP, nobody will believe him.
- fierarul 16y ago
  If Knuth announces that he proved P=NP a lot of people will believe him.
  - Tichy 16y ago
    That was kind of the joke...
- adambyrtek 16y ago
  Fortunately mathematics is based on rigorous formal proofs rather than belief, so if he really achieved that he would just publish the proof and become even more famous.
  - pfarrell 16y ago
    I may have missed a joke here, but even mathematics is based on belief. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_t...
- mzl 16y ago
  Most would not believe him straight away, since it is highly unlikely that P=NP. If the proof holds up to scrutiny though, it is not an issue of belief any more (apart form the social process of proof of course).
  - vessenes 16y ago
    Actually, in formal areas of academia (like math, where I studied), there can be considerable use of intuition even after a 'proof' goes out. I would say this is a good thing, as there are also many cases where a 'proof' is later shown to have holes, areas where everyone made an assumption and didn't realize it. A good example of this involves limits; for many years mathematicians proved a number of interesting results using infinitesimal limits. It was many decades before a mathematician (Riemann? Maybe?) noted that you can't assume that all the limits in an equation approach their number at the same rate. This was a super smart thing to notice, and junked a huge number of 'proofs' that had all relied unobtrusively on this idea. All that to say, good theoreticians spend a lot of time wondering if an idea makes sense to them or not.
    - mzl 16y ago
      This is more or less what I wanted to allude to with the social process of proof. The number of things that are actually rigorously formally proven is surprisingly small IMHO.
      - vessenes 16y ago
        I think the problem is that we can't write down all our assumptions, even if we try REALLY hard. This is some of what inspired the mathematical formalism movement; trying to make sure that we know what we think we know.
Anono 16y ago
I heard that the iTeX rumor was created by my neighbor. Same with HiTeX and TeXML. Knuth didn't prove that P=NP. He proved that P-NP=42.

Tichy 16y ago

The problem is, now if he really proves P=NP, nobody will believe him.

fierarul 16y ago
If Knuth announces that he proved P=NP a lot of people will believe him.
- Tichy 16y ago
  That was kind of the joke...
adambyrtek 16y ago
Fortunately mathematics is based on rigorous formal proofs rather than belief, so if he really achieved that he would just publish the proof and become even more famous.
- pfarrell 16y ago
  I may have missed a joke here, but even mathematics is based on belief. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_t...
mzl 16y ago
Most would not believe him straight away, since it is highly unlikely that P=NP. If the proof holds up to scrutiny though, it is not an issue of belief any more (apart form the social process of proof of course).
- vessenes 16y ago
  Actually, in formal areas of academia (like math, where I studied), there can be considerable use of intuition even after a 'proof' goes out. I would say this is a good thing, as there are also many cases where a 'proof' is later shown to have holes, areas where everyone made an assumption and didn't realize it. A good example of this involves limits; for many years mathematicians proved a number of interesting results using infinitesimal limits. It was many decades before a mathematician (Riemann? Maybe?) noted that you can't assume that all the limits in an equation approach their number at the same rate. This was a super smart thing to notice, and junked a huge number of 'proofs' that had all relied unobtrusively on this idea. All that to say, good theoreticians spend a lot of time wondering if an idea makes sense to them or not.
  - mzl 16y ago
    This is more or less what I wanted to allude to with the social process of proof. The number of things that are actually rigorously formally proven is surprisingly small IMHO.
    - vessenes 16y ago
      I think the problem is that we can't write down all our assumptions, even if we try REALLY hard. This is some of what inspired the mathematical formalism movement; trying to make sure that we know what we think we know.

Anono 16y ago

I heard that the iTeX rumor was created by my neighbor. Same with HiTeX and TeXML. Knuth didn't prove that P=NP. He proved that P-NP=42.