On Saturday, May 24, 2003, at 08:18 PM, Steve Furlong wrote:
On Saturday 24 May 2003 22:47, Jim Choate wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2003, Eric Cordian wrote:
Jim Choate forwards:
Subject: [cs/0305035] P is not equal to NP (fwd) http://xyz.lanl.gov/abs/cs.CC/0305035
P = NP, therefore, the paper contains at least one error.
Really, where's the proof?
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this email is too small to contain.
A rather elliptic demonstration of your wiles. BTW, the crank paper was already withdrawn "by the author" at the LANL site by the time I went to look at less than an hour ago. This is a good example of where a simple reputation rating graph would work well...not just "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" or "12 of 37 readers found this review useful" (a la Amazon's method), but a system where it matters that Andrew Wiles found the paper uninteresting but does not matter (to most) that Ludwig Plutonium was enthralled by it. (Actually, safest for all to have only positive comments, or lack of them, rather than invite the lawyer vultures to the party by having some sensitive soul feel "libeled" by a negative rating.) --Tim May "Dogs can't conceive of a group of cats without an alpha cat." --David Honig, on the Cypherpunks list, 2001-11