4 ms·
I think you two are disagreeing about terminology. You're the ecpert in the field, which (correctly) makes you more sensitive to terminological distinctions. W
by wlievens 13y ago
I think you two are disagreeing about terminology. You're the ecpert in the field, which (correctly) makes you more sensitive to terminological distinctions.
What's not disputed I guess, is the commonly (to CS-educated engineers) held notion that FCT is a high-profile math problem that was solved/proved by intensive automatic means rather than a human written proof, and that that raises questions regarding the meaning of "proof".
At least that's what I took home from it.
- ColinWright 13y agoOther people claim that FCT was proven by computer. Most of my colleagues say it was proven by Haken and Appel, who programmed a computer to perform a finite search. People who work in the area - including me - say it's like getting Wolfram Alpha to solve your integrals, while you do the actual thinking about what integrals need solving, why, and what to do with the answers.