4 ms·
I was referring to the press release article. I also looked at the paper now, and to me their presented proof looked more like a technicality than a new insight
by Gehinnn 2y ago
I was referring to the press release article. I also looked at the paper now, and to me their presented proof looked more like a technicality than a new insight.
If it's not solvable in polynomial time, how did nature solve it in a couple of million years?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 2y agoProbably by not modeling it as a discrete computational problem? Either way: the logic of the paper is not the logic of the summary of the press release you provided.