4 ms·
Aren't you comparing the code for calculations with the jargon of the question? I feel like the proofs would be quite long.
by jayd16 3y ago
Aren't you comparing the code for calculations with the jargon of the question? I feel like the proofs would be quite long.
- snovv_crash 3y agoSurely the example which disproves the hypothesis would be smaller than the proof that it is valid for all values?
- foota 3y agoCould be, but sometimes the description of an object can be quite involved if it's constructed in some bizarre form (e.g., the intersections of some already complicated objects, for instance)
- bigbillheck 3y agoIf you read the actual text of that mathoverflow answer you'll see that it was first disproved for dimensions >=12 and that all the rest of the work was in dimensions 3 thru 11.
- klyrs 3y agoI absolutely love this question. It cannot be answered!
- codeulike 3y agoJust trying to think of what the equivalent in code would be, and so calculating actual values seems like the closest analogue, but I know its not really comparable. I'm grasping for ideas of how can we compare the concept-density of mathematical notation with the concept-density of code?