Re: P=NP Proof Published at CERN
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 19:50, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Also here are some additional related results: 1) Access to
> > Photograph:http://documents.cern.ch/cgi-bin/setlink?base=PHO&categ=photo-tsic&id...
> > 2)Conversions Information: Portable Document Format:http://
> > documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/hep-lat/9612/9612008.pdf
>
> Wgat have these to do with your drivel?
>
> > > Does that mean "bogus"?.
> >
> > No, you are welcome to try to disprove it.
>
> There is nothing there to disprove; it's "not even wrong".
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk
> So we have proven given false\proof not even wrong=proof=
And you have top-replied with yet more gibberish.
Martin Musatov
constructive work.
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 20:07, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have apparently been reviewed again as he page parsed at CERN and
> > gave a new URL:
> > Here it is:http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
>
> New URL, same old shit.
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk
replied:
> Please refrain from cussing.
Please refrain from breathing.
Martin Musatov
it." --Martin Musatov
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote:
> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> on.
> It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> on.
>
> -- m
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk
replied:
> "Sometimes what you read is just as important as what you read into
> it." --Martin Musatov
So what is there to read, or read into in gibberish like
- Show quoted text -
> Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];.
> 1+.. ..=1+
> ....
> 1!
> +
> .. ..-1 ..22!
> +.
> Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:.
> .. .. =..0+ ....cos
> ......
> ..
> +....sin
> ......
> ..
> 8
> ..=1
?
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 22:15, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Whether bungled by IMAJAM,
> > or CERNm when it was put on-line or after does it matter to us here
>
> So it was definitely not bungled by Martin Musatov?
Yes.
Martin Musatov
refuge for evil."
> on. *What specifically is "unintelligible"?
"Vagueness is the last refuge for ignorance. Complexity is the last
refuge for evil."--Martin Musatov
>
> -- m
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
It does not even qualify as a text, let alone as
a coherent exposition of an heuristic which may or
may not resolve a mathematical problem.
I simply cannot believe you are serious, for even
a minimally trained Markov chain will do a better job
both at coming up with English prose and at following
minimal usenet conventions in composing posts: even
BURT makes more sense and is more articulate than
you are, and you are less intruiguing than him too.
I trust you will not be particularly disrupted in your
pursuits if I start ignoring you from now on, so I will.
Cheers,
-- m
amy666
> Martin Musatov a écrit :
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox
> proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> >
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
> 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
> 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere
> else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on
> how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this
> experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology
> I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a
> more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this
> basic result.
>
>
> Dont worry : if you have really proved P=NP, any
> working program solving
> any NP-complete problem in polynomial time will be
> enough to bring you
> fame, the Clay prize money, and perhaps even
> chicks...
>
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Martin Musatov
> > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
Fool !
its just another crank , the reference to CERN only makes its sad.
you wouldnt recognize a real crank , if he bites your nose !
the P = NP proof is bogus !!
i cant believe mentioning CERN is enough to trick you !
you still amaze me , but in a bad way !
cmon , JSH does better than that !
i hope no money was spent on that piece of crap ...
no regards
tommy1729
Martin Musatov
> On 9 May, 17:10, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ****Denis: I understand the effort required to keep a nice garden, so
> > I apologize if I trampled your shrubs. Re:http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ecrit-charter.html,
> > though I hope you're right re: neat results, Millenium Prize money,
>
> Millennium.
>
> > and the ladies! (though my heart is really with only one)
> > ****victor_meldrew_...@yahoo.co.uk: I like a fool misspelled
> > "orthodox". While you share the same first name with my father I can
> > only pray the reason the "666" is there because 2/3 didn't fit.
> > Re: "Does that mean it's bogus?" ***You tell me:
>
>Y+ur +pinti+n mish-mash that this self-respecting
> crank released to the world. Yes, I did:
> Look at owner pdf: All systems go:
>
> > NOTE: The Google Docs parsing began generating content vertically as
> > it ran the equations I had prepared in a Microsoft Word file:
>
> Real mathematicians are professional and polite.
>
> > So indeed my proof:
>
>This proof:
>
>
>
> > Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];.
> > 1+.. ..=1+
> > ....
> > 1!
> > +
> > .. ..-1 ..22!
> > +.
> > Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:.
> > .. .. =..0+ ....cos
> > ......
> > ..
> > +....sin
> > ......
> > ..
> > 8
> > ..=1
Martin Musatov
> On May 9, 6:00 am, A N Niel <ann...@nym.alias.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <b36eb4ca-cbed-41b3-b369-4b0f559a1...@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox proof P=NP has been
> > > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> > > 1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf
> >
> > > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > > it.
> >
> > > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
> >
> >
> > > Martin Musatov
> > > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
> >
> > by you, or by IMAJAM (or CERN) when it was put on-line?
> >
> > The mathematics formulas in that PDF are identical to as they were in parsing on p.3 of this document here. > http://member.thinkfree.com/myoffice/show.se?f=a2262e3b4f62ab0338f0d41fde4ffb82 The whole expansion on page 3.
> >Thank you, so much for your time attention and challenge: Martin Musatov
> m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.~~~~P==NP. Thank you for your contribution to this good work. Note to Editor: time to make it happen! Note to doctors: Let's make this work.
Martin Musatov
> On May 10, 5:41 pm, s...@sig.for.address (Victor Eijkhout) wrote:
> > Use TeX/LaTeX the way every does and has been doing since before there
> > was an internet. Best way to get nicely readable math documents.
> >
> > Don't use evil corporate monopolies like MS or Google.
>
> But now yet better use TeXmacs, the free math text editor with ability
> to export into LaTeX.
>
> http://www.texmacs.org--I will use what I use. I don't mix politics and math. *unless I they agree*
Martin Musatov
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote:
> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> <There is no room for your negativity here so I am clipping it (at least
> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> computational complexity theory
> on.>
> ]<It is actually possible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> on.<[
>
> -- m
Thank you for stoking the fire warm. "When I grow up I am going to be
a singer." ±±Frank Sinatra
Martin Musatov
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> on.
> on.
>
> -- m
You can figure it out, I have faith in you. But in case you lack faith
in yourself the feedback I am seeking on is [P==NP].on.
>
> -- m
Martin Musatov
logic is more important.
David C. Ullrich wrote:
> On Sat, 9 May 2009 14:19:50 -0700 (PDT), Martin Musatov
> <marty....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 9, 12:15�pm, Mariano Su�rez-Alvarez
> ><mariano.suarezalva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> >> > published on CERN preprints.
> >>
> >> >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >>
> >> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> >> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> >> > it.
> >>
> >> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> >> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> >> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> >> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
> >>
> >> A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> >> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> >> computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> >> on.
> >> It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> >> on.
> >>
> >> -- m
> >
> >do you have the time to help me>?9 12:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
> >Local: Sat, May 9 2009 12:15 pm
>
> If you want help you have to make a readable copy of the
> proof available.
>
>
> David C. Ullrich
>
> "Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
> That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
> (John Jones, "My talk about Godel to the post-grads."
> in sci.logic.)
Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 17:10, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ****Denis: I understand the effort required to keep a nice garden, so
> > I apologize if I trampled your shrubs. Re:http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ecrit-charter.html,
> > though I hope you're right re: neat results, Millenium Prize money,
>
> Millennium.
>
> > and the ladies! (though my heart is really with only one)
> > ****victor_meldrew_...@yahoo.co.uk: I like a fool misspelled
> > "orthodox". While you share the same first name with my father I can
> > only pray the reason the "666" is there because 2/3 didn't fit.
> > Re: "Does that mean it's bogus?" ***You tell me:
>
> What it is is an unintelligible mish-mash that no self-respecting
> crank would have released to the world. Did you even bother
> to look at your own pdf?
>
> > NOTE: The Google Docs parsing began generating content vertically as
> > it ran the equations I had prepared in a Microsoft Word file,
>
> Real Mathematicians do not use Macroshit Turd.
>
> > So indeed my proof
>
> What fucking proof?
>
> <Unintelligible drivel snipped save for a brief extract>
>
> > Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];.
> > 1+.. ..=1+
> > ....
> > 1!
> > +
> > .. ..-1 ..22!
> > +.
> > Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:.
> > .. .. =..0+ ....cos
> > ......
> > ..
> > +....sin
> > ......
> > ..
> > 8
> > ..=1
>
> And you want us to bow down to your genius becuase you write
> crap like this?
Might you be so kind as to share the abstract <extract>. I do not
recall mentioning bowing down. May I request a reference for this
statement. Signed, Martin Musatov
Martin Michael Musatov
762HW-QD98X-TQVXJ-8RKRQ-RJC9V
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on
Usenet.
Source: http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/General/comp.theory/200904/msg00122.html
From: Martin Michael Musatov <marty.musatov@xxxxxxxxx>·
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 07:35:05 0700 (PDT)·
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB'4_'DE3*./E:9DJ_'D('4'_2
'D1,'! 'DE4'1C) AJ 'D*5HJ* D*/J/ E3*B(D 41H7 BHB 'DF41 AJ E4'1J9
HJCJEJ/J' (JF*GJ 'D*5HJ* AJ 3 E'JH 2009). 5H* 'D"F!
7D('* 'D5HD 9DI 'DEF 'D/1'3J) DHJCJE'FJ' 2009 EA*H) 'D"F 3,D 'D"F
[#:DB]
[3'9/F' AJ 'D*1,E)!]
F/9HC DDE3'GE) AJ #3(H9 'D*'1J. 'D93C1J HGH #/ 'D#3'(J9 'DE*9//) EF
#3'(J9 'DHJCJ.
[#:DB]
FB'4 'DE3*./E:9DJ 'D('4' 2
EF HJCJ(J/J' 'DEH3H9) 'D1)
*H,/ D/JC 13'&D ,/J/) (".1 *:JJ1).
Date: 1 Apr 2004 10:30:59 0800
Making use of a new type of modeltheoretic tool the Boolean Sieve
we have been able to construct a Ptime algorithm for SAT, thus
providing a resolution to one of the most famous, longstanding open
problems of Theoretical Computer Science. A detailed, but accessible
and informal, general overview of the Boolean Sieve method (more
information can be found here by carrying out a Google groups search
under "Boolean Sieve" and "Mathematician's Algorithm"). However, a
brief description will be provided below of the method, some
applications outside the specific context of SAT, as well as an
overview of how it was applied to SAT. Opportunity providing, an
abstract or possibly even an online copy of the submitted paper (just
accepted for publication) will be made available at the above Web
site.
What is a Boolean Sieve? Basically, it is a construct that is
generated from a set of models, for an axiomfree theory ("free
theory"), that are defined to filter out the possible logical
relations between a set of statements which could be rendered in that
theory. A possible application may be to seek out significant
axiomatizations that may be applied to the set of operations and
predicates in the underlying free theory. The term "filter" is more
than appropriate given the nature of the formal machinery behind the
method.
For instance, consider Group Theory. An interesting (but not well
known) fact is that groups can be defined by their inverse operation
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.1
(division), just as well by multiplication. The underlying free theory
is an algebraic sort with the following set of operations:
() |> 1 (identity)
(a, b) |> a/b (quotient)
So, it then becomes natural to ask: what are the logical relations
between the possible statements that could be made over the underlying
free theory. Such a situation is precisely the kind of circumstance
where one would use the Boolean Sieve method.
What one does is write down a bunch of statements (ideally, including
a set of statements that we already know from prior considerations
would completely characterize a group), and then select a bunch of
models for the free theory (which in the case at hand may or may not
actually be groups). Each model should have the property that each
statement has a truth value whose evaluation in that model can be done
"efficiently".
The result is a set of raw data from which a profile can be assembled.
The method of integrating all the basic facts is the Boolean Sieve,
itself. The result of applying the Sieve is an efficient
characterization, as a set of Horn clauses, of the Boolean lattice
generated by the statements. >From there (for instance) one could read
off the significant relations and possible axiomatizations, e.g.,
(a/c)/(b/c) = a/b; a/a = 1; a/1 = a
or for Abelien groups:
a(bc) = c(ba); a(ab) = b; 11 = 1.
More generally, a Boolean Sieve will allow us to filter out the
possible relations between a set of statements. The Sieve is called
Complete for that set, if all possible relations are constructed by
the Sieve. What we've actually done is resolve a generalization of SAT
(i.e., determine the validity of a Horn clause involving Boolean
formulas over Nvariables) by defining a process (that is N^3 in
complexity) that generates a complete Boolean Sieve that is N^3 in
size.
Why N^3? Well, this is where it gets interesting: the method for
generating the complete Boolean Sieve is essentially a disguised
version of the Earley parsing algorithm for contextfree grammars! The
significance and nature of this link remains a total mystery to us.
Currently, we are investigating extensions of the Boolean Sieve which
will provide a basis for modeltheoretic theorem proving methods or
"Semantic Theorem Proving". As any expert mathematician will be able
to relate, such an appropach has a far more direct bearing on the way
mathematicians actually approach problems. They will take a stock set
of examples, run a set of possible statements through the examples
(oftentimes subconsciously) and "magically" arrive at a set of
conjectures. We conjecture that the latent method behind this process
is none other than the Boolean Sieve, itself. We even speculate that
"mathematical intuition", itself, may be nothing more than the by
product of this subconscious process. Thus, for instance, one could
develop a more honed "intuition" by having a larger stock of ready
made examples "under the belt", so to say.
Needless to say, these developments will go far beyond the specifics
of the P = NP problem, as most anyone would have been able to
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.2
> On 9 May, 09:18, Martin Musatov
> <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox
> proof
>
> Does that mean "bogus"?
>
> > P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
8XPM9-7F9HD-4JJQP-TP64Y-RPFFV
762HW-QD98X-TQVXJ-8RKRQ-RJC9V
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on
Usenet.
Source: http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/General/comp.theory/200904/msg00122.html
From: Martin Michael Musatov <marty.musatov@xxxxxxxxx>·
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 07:35:05 0700 (PDT)·
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB'4_'DE3*./E:9DJ_'D('4'_2
'D1,'! 'DE4'1C) AJ 'D*5HJ* D*/J/ E3*B(D 41H7 BHB 'DF41 AJ E4'1J9
HJCJEJ/J' (JF*GJ 'D*5HJ* AJ 3 E'JH 2009). 5H* 'D"F!
7D('* 'D5HD 9DI 'DEF 'D/1'3J) DHJCJE'FJ' 2009 EA*H) 'D"F 3,D 'D"F
[#:DB]
[3'9/F' AJ 'D*1,E)!]
F/9HC DDE3'GE) AJ #3(H9 'D*'1J. 'D93C1J HGH #/ 'D#3'(J9 'DE*9//) EF
#3'(J9 'DHJCJ.
[#:DB]
FB'4 'DE3*./E:9DJ 'D('4' 2
EF HJCJ(J/J' 'DEH3H9) 'D1)
*H,/ D/JC 13'&D ,/J/) (".1 *:JJ1).
Date: 1 Apr 2004 10:30:59 0800
Making use of a new type of modeltheoretic tool the Boolean Sieve
we have been able to construct a Ptime algorithm for SAT, thus
providing a resolution to one of the most famous, longstanding open
problems of Theoretical Computer Science. A detailed, but accessible
and informal, general overview of the Boolean Sieve method (more
information can be found here by carrying out a Google groups search
under "Boolean Sieve" and "Mathematician's Algorithm"). However, a
brief description will be provided below of the method, some
applications outside the specific context of SAT, as well as an
overview of how it was applied to SAT. Opportunity providing, an
abstract or possibly even an online copy of the submitted paper (just
accepted for publication) will be made available at the above Web
site.
What is a Boolean Sieve? Basically, it is a construct that is
generated from a set of models, for an axiomfree theory ("free
theory"), that are defined to filter out the possible logical
relations between a set of statements which could be rendered in that
theory. A possible application may be to seek out significant
axiomatizations that may be applied to the set of operations and
predicates in the underlying free theory. The term "filter" is more
than appropriate given the nature of the formal machinery behind the
method.
For instance, consider Group Theory. An interesting (but not well
known) fact is that groups can be defined by their inverse operation
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.1
(division), just as well by multiplication. The underlying free theory
is an algebraic sort with the following set of operations:
() |> 1 (identity)
(a, b) |> a/b (quotient)
So, it then becomes natural to ask: what are the logical relations
between the possible statements that could be made over the underlying
free theory. Such a situation is precisely the kind of circumstance
where one would use the Boolean Sieve method.
What one does is write down a bunch of statements (ideally, including
a set of statements that we already know from prior considerations
would completely characterize a group), and then select a bunch of
models for the free theory (which in the case at hand may or may not
actually be groups). Each model should have the property that each
statement has a truth value whose evaluation in that model can be done
"efficiently".
The result is a set of raw data from which a profile can be assembled.
The method of integrating all the basic facts is the Boolean Sieve,
itself. The result of applying the Sieve is an efficient
characterization, as a set of Horn clauses, of the Boolean lattice
generated by the statements. >From there (for instance) one could read
off the significant relations and possible axiomatizations, e.g.,
(a/c)/(b/c) = a/b; a/a = 1; a/1 = a
or for Abelien groups:
a(bc) = c(ba); a(ab) = b; 11 = 1.
More generally, a Boolean Sieve will allow us to filter out the
possible relations between a set of statements. The Sieve is called
Complete for that set, if all possible relations are constructed by
the Sieve. What we've actually done is resolve a generalization of SAT
(i.e., determine the validity of a Horn clause involving Boolean
formulas over Nvariables) by defining a process (that is N^3 in
complexity) that generates a complete Boolean Sieve that is N^3 in
size.
Why N^3? Well, this is where it gets interesting: the method for
generating the complete Boolean Sieve is essentially a disguised
version of the Earley parsing algorithm for contextfree grammars! The
significance and nature of this link remains a total mystery to us.
Currently, we are investigating extensions of the Boolean Sieve which
will provide a basis for modeltheoretic theorem proving methods or
"Semantic Theorem Proving". As any expert mathematician will be able
to relate, such an appropach has a far more direct bearing on the way
mathematicians actually approach problems. They will take a stock set
of examples, run a set of possible statements through the examples
(oftentimes subconsciously) and "magically" arrive at a set of
conjectures. We conjecture that the latent method behind this process
is none other than the Boolean Sieve, itself. We even speculate that
"mathematical intuition", itself, may be nothing more than the by
product of this subconscious process. Thus, for instance, one could
develop a more honed "intuition" by having a larger stock of ready
made examples "under the belt", so to say.
Needless to say, these developments will go far beyond the specifics
of the P = NP problem, as most anyone would have been able to
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.
I Just Proved [P=NP] and I get to announce it on Usenet.2
Martin Michael Musatov
>
> > familiar with the Internet...a huge+
>
> Use TeX/LaTeX the way every does and has been doing
> since before there
> was an internet. Best way to get nicely readable math
> documents.
>
> Don't use evil corporate monopolies like MS or
> Google.
>
> --
> Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
Martin Michael Musatov
>
> its just another crank , the reference to CERN only
P.s. I do not make a penny on my work$. These words are free as they should be. Mathematics is the greatest thing that ever happened to me. I am so excited to learn and share and too busy to address my critics who scorn me but fail to provide details or explain anything they say.
Martin Michael Musatov
Joshua Cranmer
> Please refrain from cussing. Thank you. This is a site for
> constructive work.
You must be new here.
--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
Martin Michael Musatov
Martin Michael Musatov
Joshua Cranmer
> If there is something I am doing wrong correct it or tell me how I
> can correct it. If you cannot do this then simply accept my work as
> part of this body of work:
Several things:
1. Stop top-posting. See end of message.
2. Please format your Usenet messages correctly.
3. Trim replies as well (most sci.math'ers seem to have problems with
this... *sigh*)
Now, about your actual work. What is there to say? You don't even make
an argument, at least as far as I or anyone else can see. There's no
presentation of theory. BURT (a recent poster/crank/troll/whatever you
want to call him) at least has an argument, even if it is completely and
utterly fallacious.
And it's not Markov, it's Markov chain models--better known as things
that can create random text that sounds plausible, cf. Scigen. An
example of such text:
Many computational biologists would agree that, had it not been for
trainable theory, the visualization of IPv7 might never have occurred.
In fact, few physicists would disagree with the investigation of
rasterization, which embodies the intuitive principles of software
engineering. In our research we propose a novel methodology for the
exploration of randomized algorithms (Fat), which we use to disprove
that IPv7 and write-ahead logging are largely incompatible [17].
As nonsensical as that paragraph is, what Mariano was trying to say is
that such text makes more sense than your paper.
A: Because it breaks the flow of conversation.
Q: Why should I not top-post?
A: Posting replies above the original
Q: What is top-posting?
Martin Michael Musatov
> P=NP has been
> published on CERN preprints.--Martin Musatov
>
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
> 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
> 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
>
> It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else.
> My purpose in
> posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on
> how to strengthen
> it.
>
> I would specifically, as was my intention with this
> experiment, like
> feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I
> used and
> suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more
> broadly accepted
> peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic
> result.
>
Joshua Cranmer
> Listen to the nonsense you speak. Do you recognize the only
> individuals able to respond carry the name Mariano and Victor with a
> "666" in the email address for the U.K.? That is not a coicidence.
Yes... most of the people in this newsgroup know better than to respond
to yet another claim of proof of a major unsolved problem by someone
with no credentials whatsoever.
This is, what, the fourth one I've seen in the past year?
JSH first attempted it by finding a polynomial algorithm to the
Traveling Salesman Problem last August... granted it neither worked nor
solved the problem, although that last part was eventually ironed out.
That's actually three attempts, all of which have known counterexamples.
Then there was the person who "solved" 3-SAT... a counterexample took I
think a week or so, but eventually it was found.
Next was the proof that solved equations over GF-2; in here, the
NP-completeness of the problem being solved was in question.
And then here's yours... to quote someone else:
> It is surprising that P=NP is still an open problem; after all, we get a
> new proof every month!
Jesse F. Hughes
[...]
> If you want help you have to make a readable copy of the
> proof available.
Er, guys?
This is the same guy who announced his proof of P=NP on Apr. 26,
2009 (see
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.theory/browse_thread/thread/44f6bd4f4663f5e9/d8ef0cf43a497831?lnk=raot).
That announcement happened to be a repost of a 1999 April Fool's
joke by a different poster (or a different alias, but I doubt it).
(See
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.theory/browse_frm/thread/f18d2077dd655d71/c52bcff5ef26f00c?lnk=gst&q="boolean+sieve"#c52bcff5ef26f00c)
He was having us on then. Surely, it is obvious he's having us on
again.
--
"So why talk [about my factoring method] out on Usenet? Because it's a
highly public place so I'm unlikely to disappear[...] You people are
my protection. [...] You may be what's keeping me free and walking out
in the open air." -- James S. Harris, theory guy on the edge.
Martin Musatov
E = ellinit(
[1, 0, 0, -35822192130572784206480514296239908919425,
2609719568750620065454923921391767461604324824175741297455625]
)
of conductor
5751679256865023413274743068599885347967822805404077230
= 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37^2 41 43 47 53 59 61
187172595299 7081017707425445923
has torsion group Z/3Z, generated by
tors=[104605984638686332650,84532082161048799807719188075];
Its Mordell-Weil group E(Q) has rank at least 13, with independent
points
[111765301087195517610, 46430435456204326675146597675],
[111116582336682124050, 34996683196066023464195962875],
[111913032824849252130, 49063192420997854527679793475],
[110123909838304503990, 18512376609554805482691445335],
[109146709187032115370, 10506129421757959855129586475],
[110382143345238886970, 22567063509763234684093270475],
[110245179394644403100, 20382223547410442956289336075],
[108522553923729999720, 17018033523451040060797113555],
[108512500742043656106, 17163334387154750309786061867],
[109741057847530716000, 13297340647117901361820923075],
[108902034932485796850, 12260441074498263650721717075],
[110291739877102075140, 21117334974942773428569817185],
[111294342929434080810, 38103895579546047175336101675].
There are at least 1201*2 integer points on this curve. It's 5th known
curve
with torsion Z/Z3 and rank at least 13.
Curves
E1 = [1, 0, 0, -560715933702165990261993692150795879540,
5299428030171662962897867758309003693598430128674403539600]
E2 = [1, 0, 0, -73262771788012628080963454016709537315,
240598790801630018163569184912325717758514948008409652225]
E3 = [1, 0, 0, -7032750154590180472810630714591592198580,
234825110521164672374627005794918283861649641835073217760400]
E4 = [1, 0, 0, -245159698188178088219881294961406816115,
1510191009902655798002552220643158891490617937867360088417]
also have torsion Z/Z3 and rank at least 13. I found curves E1, E2, E3
at 2007,
and curve at 2008 (see http://web.math.hr/~duje/tors/tors.html ).
There are also many integer points on these curves:
at least 890*2 on E1,
at least 1289*2 on E2,
at least 888*2 on E3,
and at least 870*2 on E4.
--Yurij Eroshkin
Martin Musatov wrote:
> An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> published on CERN preprints.
>
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 19:50, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Also here are some additional related results: 1) Access to
> > Photograph:http://documents.cern.ch/cgi-bin/setlink?base=PHO&categ=photo-tsic&id...
> > 2)Conversions Information: Portable Document Format:http://
> > documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/hep-lat/9612/9612008.pdf
>
> Wgat have these to do with your drivel?
>
> > > Does that mean "bogus"?.
> >
> > No, you are welcome to try to disprove it.
>
> There is nothing there to disprove; it's "not even wrong". I agree with the proof. I cannot deny it by the evidence shown it solves several NP-complete problems referenced here:
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 09:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof
>
> Does that mean "bogus"? No that does not mean bogus. See my results below:
Martin Musatov
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote:
> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> on.
> It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> on.
>
> -- m***Exaclty what part of *impossible* do you want feedback on? Thanks.__martin musatov m....@vzw.blackberry.net
Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov wrote:
> On May 9, 12:15 pm, Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
> <mariano.suarezalva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > > it.
> >
> > > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
> >
> > A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> > that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> > computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> > on.
> > It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> > on.
> >
> > -- m
>
> do you have the time to help me>?9 12:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
> Local: Sat, May 9 2009 12:15 pm
Did anyone else notice an extra "m" pop up after CERN like this?
"CERNm"?
Martin Michael Musatov
|©2009 MeAmI.org:"Hello Universe!"l©2009 Martin M. Musatov
Ipv6=octet:"Michael"=M. See prior message. Repeat.”=(k)
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: marty....@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 05:08:02
To: <rkm...@yahoo.com>; <in...@MeAmI.org>; <marty....@gmail.com>
Cc: <m....@vzw.blackberry.com>
Subject: Fw: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Here is a proof. I did not reply from MeAmI. The server did. That is A.I. The "Hello Martin," must have been generated by a script. Perhaps the legendary "Hello World" or maybe even Wordpress.org with its "Hello Dolly" script.
I think this is so amazing. Please reply.
The rkm...@yahoo.com may be interesting if we assign variables to the "hello" stream.
Just go along with this. You do not need to reply with any technical information as it is the code that will be generated later by the MeAmI.org server I am interested in.
0=Yes
1=No
l©2009 Martin Musatov: stream: no octet:p=|pl©2009 Googlel©2009 MeAmI.org
------Original Message------
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
To: marty....@gmail.com
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Sent: May 10, 2009 9:37 PM
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
Technical details of permanent failure:
The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect. Learn more at http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=7720
[mail1.byetcluster.com. (5): Connection dropped]
----- Original message -----
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.12.1 with SMTP id 1mr7003228anl.107.1241745832189; Thu, 07
May 2009 18:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
References: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 18:23:51 -0700
Message-ID: <cf9a0a8b0905071823o769...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: This is a test
From: Martin Musatov <marty....@gmail.com>
To: "MeAmI.org" <in...@meami.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
--0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
P=NP. Martin
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, MeAmI.org <in...@meami.org> wrote:
> Hello Martin,
>
----- Message truncated -----
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox proof
> P=NP has been
> published on CERN preprints.
>
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
> 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
> 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
>
> It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else.
> My purpose in
> posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on
> how to strengthen
> it.
>
> I would specifically, as was my intention with this
> experiment, like
> feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I
> used and
> suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more
> broadly accepted
> peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic
> result.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Martin Musatov
> m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
This is a script I ran. It explains itself to the careful study:
l©2009 MeAmI.org:"Hello Universe!"l©2009 Martin M. Musatov
Ipv6=octet:"Michael"=M. See prior message. Repeat.”=(k)
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: marty....@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 05:08:02
To: <rkm...@yahoo.com>; <in...@MeAmI.org>; <marty....@gmail.com>
Cc: <m....@vzw.blackberry.com>
Subject: Fw: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Here is a proof. I did not reply from MeAmI. The server did. That is A.I. The "Hello Martin," must have been generated by a script. Perhaps the legendary "Hello World" or maybe even Wordpress.org with its "Hello Dolly" script.
I think this is so amazing. Please reply.
The rkm...@yahoo.com may be interesting if we assign variables to the "hello" stream.
Just go along with this. You do not need to reply with any technical information as it is the code that will be generated later by the MeAmI.org server I am interested in.
0=Yes
1=No
l©2009 Martin Musatov: stream: no octet:p=|pl©2009 Googlel©2009 MeAmI.org
------Original Message------
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
To: marty....@gmail.com
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Sent: May 10, 2009 9:37 PM
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
Technical details of permanent failure:
The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect. Learn more at http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=7720
[mail1.byetcluster.com. (5): Connection dropped]
----- Original message -----
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.12.1 with SMTP id 1mr7003228anl.107.1241745832189; Thu, 07
May 2009 18:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
References: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 18:23:51 -0700
Message-ID: <cf9a0a8b0905071823o769...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: This is a test
From: Martin Musatov <marty....@gmail.com>
To: "MeAmI.org" <in...@meami.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
--0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
P=NP. Martin
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, MeAmI.org <in...@meami.org> wrote:
> Hello Martin,
>
----- Message truncated -----
Martin Michael Musatov
Martin Michael Musatov
>
> > Martin Musatov a écrit :
> > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox
> > proof P=NP has been
> > > published on CERN preprints.
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
>
> >
> 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
>
> > 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
> > >
> > > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere
> > else. My purpose in
> > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions
> on
> > how to strengthen
> > > it.
> > >
> > > I would specifically, as was my intention with
> this
> > experiment, like
> > > feedback from anyone interested in the
> methodology
> > I used and
> > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a
> > more broadly accepted
> > > peer-reviewed published proof building on this
> > basic result.
> >
> >
> > working program solving
> > any NP-complete problem in polynomial time will be
> > enough to bring you
> > fame, the Clay prize money, and perhaps even
> > chicks...
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Martin Musatov
> > > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
>
> its just another crank , the reference to CERN only
> makes its sad.
>
> nose !
>
> the P = NP proof is bogus !!
>
> i cant believe mentioning CERN is enough to trick you
> !
>
> you still amaze me , but in a bad way !
>
> cmon , JSH does better than that !
>
> i hope no money was spent on that piece of crap ...
>
>
> no regards
>
> tommy1729
Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
Martin Michael Musatov
> P=NP has been
> published on CERN preprints.
>
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
> 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
> 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
>
> It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else.
> My purpose in
> posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on
> how to strengthen
> it.
>
> I would specifically, as was my intention with this
> experiment, like
> feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I
> used and
> suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more
> broadly accepted
> peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic
> result.
>
>
> Martin Musatov
> m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
Fair warning: Do not be negative or call this post bogus without providing a mathematically sound reason and contradiction to the published proof: if you do this your post will be ignored. I only answer to posts which address me in a humble positive constructive manner with respect to this discussion. There will be no name calling or labelling persons with negative terms like "crank". The mathematician that does this speaks poorly of his own opinion and the reader should be advised that in this context it is highly innapropriate and perhaps downright destructive towards any resolution.
Martin Musatov
> Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > familiar with the Internet...a huge+
>
> Use TeX/LaTeX the way every does and has been doing since before there
> was an internet. Best way to get nicely readable math documents.
>
> Don't use evil corporate monopolies like MS or Google.
>
> Victor.
> --
> Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
My father's name is Victor Musatov. I have not spoken to him in two
years though I love him dearly and I believe he understands this.
--Victor Eikjhout > Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
Note: The above sentence is there simply to satisfy mathematical
values given the placement of variables/letters in the sentence. Mods:
please note this.
Martin Musatov
> Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > familiar with the Internet...a huge+
>
> Use TeX/LaTeX the way every does and has been doing since before there
> was an internet. Best way to get nicely readable math documents.
>
> Don't use evil corporate monopolies like MS or Google.
>
> Victor.
> --
> Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
How does that have to do with whether or not my proof is correct?
Martin Musatov
> On May 10, 5:41 pm, s...@sig.for.address (Victor Eijkhout) wrote:
>
> > Use TeX/LaTeX the way every does and has been doing since before there
> > was an internet. Best way to get nicely readable math documents.
>
> > Don't use evil corporate monopolies like MS or Google.
>
> to export into LaTeX.
>
> http://www.texmacs.org
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China or my proof?
Martin Musatov
> On Sat, 9 May 2009 14:19:50 -0700 (PDT), Martin Musatov
>
>
>
> <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On May 9, 12:15 pm, Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
> ><mariano.suarezalva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > published on CERN preprints.
>
>
> >> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> >> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> >> > it.
>
> >> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> >> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> >> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> >> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> >> that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> >> computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> >> on.
> >> It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> >> on.
>
> >> -- m
>
> >do you have the time to help me>?9 12:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
> >Local: Sat, May 9 2009 12:15 pm
>
> proof available.
>
>
> "Understanding Godel isn't about following his formal proof.
> That would make a mockery of everything Godel was up to."
> (John Jones, "My talk about Godel to the post-grads."
> in sci.logic.)
Why does Godel keep coming up?
Martin Musatov
> Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote:
> > A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least
> > that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> > computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> > on.
> > It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> > on.
>
> since the geometry had to be somehow related to computational complexity...
>
> --
> Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
> tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
Well for starters why does the section of you complaining about my
work and insulting me "magically" get replaced by a comment by Donald
E. Knuth on this board would be a good first thing I would like
feedback on. Why did this happen?
Martin Musatov
> In article
> <b36eb4ca-cbed-41b3-b369-4b0f559a1...@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
>
> >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
>
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
>
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
>
> > Martin Musatov
> > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
> by you, or bungled by IMAJAM (or CERN) when it was put on-line?
It was done by me the uploading was intentional and experimental and
deliberate as to the current state. Each step along the way was not.
i.e. the parsing from Google docs and the side left margin vertical
numbering done by my upload at Oxford where just happenstance but they
intrigued be by the uniqueness of the nature of the result. How does
the machine know in the randomness of everything against these
equations to count to 10 at very specific intervals against equations.
That sounds like A.I. to me. Or could there be something more to this?
Could there be a more profound less worldly cause?
Martin Musatov
I am new here but that does not mean I have to tolerate insults from
academics who have legitimate .edu accounts talking to me like sailor
or sixth-grader who needs soap in their mouth (as my mother would say
playfully)... ;) Please, I am trying to get some work done here.
Martin Musatov
You see now this is getting interesting. Can we at least agree that
the below statement is true?
The below statment (written above) refers to this statment (the one
that is asking if we can agree is true): "CERN: European Organization
for Nuclear Research has published a paper entitled "A Symbolic and a
Literal" which contains a claimed P=NP proof containing an address to
legendary computer scientist and computational complexity maven
Stephen Arthur Cook. CERN is the world's largest particle physics
laboratory. The paper was uploaded to their database by Martin
Musatov."(the preceding was a statement which the author prior asked:
"Can we at least agree that the below statement is true?")--Martin
Musatov
Martin Musatov
May I ask since you seem to be more agreeable and professional than
the crudeness prior, what you make of this information?
The below is an email I received: (please note I own
scri...@yahoo.com and registered the group pequ...@yahoogroups.com
but decided deliberately to use marty....@gmail.com for reasons of
proving P==NP.
--- In pequ...@yahoogroups.com, "scriber77" <marty.musatov@...>
wrote:
>
> This is the html version of the file http://www.npp.co.in/ClayProblem.pdf.
> Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
> Page 1
> 1A go at the Clay Millennium problem NP=PAbstractThe problem posed is whether
Non Computational time (Non deterministic Polynomialtime-NP) Algorithm
produce
Polynomial time (deterministic polynomial time-P)algorithm results,
that is
whether they are equal. That is NP=P. A six City traverse of theof a
traveling
Sales man is considered . There exists a starting city and an ending
city.The
problem is to converge into a minimal cost tour from the starting city
to
thedestination city without traversing a city twice. An algorithm is
developed
which employsBubble Sort(BS) as component which is proved NP complete.
The same
Algorithm whenQuick Sort(QS) is employed instead of BS turns out to be
P type.
They produce the sameminimal cost, proving NP=P. The Halting problem
remain
resolved.ContentsNon deterministic polynomial time NP algorithms can
be either
General casewhich are all algorithms that have algorithms but don't
halt in
legitimate time which willgo on beyond legitimate time to halt or has
to be
`Drop Dead Halted' and Special casewhere the symbol sequences are
gibberish in
nature and are made to halt with drop deadhalts.For the general case
an N-City
Travelling Sales Mans Problem (TSP) is chosen to provethe phenomenon
NP=P. We
are required to find out the minimal cost incurred by himwhen touring
all these
selected cities on a sales tour starting from a selected city to
adestination
city not stepping into one city twice in the tour. Here a 5-city tour
isdemonstrated as a representative example of the N-city tour with the
costs
marked in thegraph (Figure 1, pp2). It is bidirectional graph and the
costs are
identical for forward andbackward traverse. Representative costs based
on
distance between cities tend to produceconverging results for the
Algorithm in
the cities chosen. For the sake of this problem it issufficient to
take costs
same for both directions. Those who want to check out different
weights are
urged to do so but it is clear that it will produce appropriate result
without
change in the resulting proof. Table 1 gives the outgoing and incoming
costs for
different cities. The cities chosen are the Indian cities of Cochin (C
)-Madras(M)-Bangalore(B)-Hydrabad(H)-Pune(P). The Algorithm for
generating the
minimal cost tour is as follows.1. Arrange the costs from each city in
fields.
Sort it in the Ascending order.2. At starting city find the minimal
cost out of
all the costs from that city, to othercities. Mark the city header
with * and
write the minimal cost beside it. (Since thelist is sorted the minimal
costs
will remain at the beginning of the list) . Underlinealso, the
selected cost.3.
At the next city where the previous city lead to find the minimal cost
to the
next whichever city. If this city is already traversed and is the
destination
city choosethe next minimal cost. Add it to the previous cost. Place a
* at the
header andwrite the total cost till then against it. Underline the
selected
cost.4. Repeat 3 till the destination city is reached.5. The number
appearing
before the final city is the minimal cost required, (sincethis is a
forward
looking algorithm).6. You do this for all transitions from the
starting city and
the minimal is cost is theleast cost arrived.Table 1 on last page (pp
11) gives
the rundown of this Algorithm.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 2
> 2
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 3
> 3Bubble SortIn the example traverse of six-city TSP algorithm use Bubble Sort
(BS-Figure 2, pp 4) tosort the field in the ascending ( step1 of
algorithm). In
BS the bottom number is comparedwith the one above number. If it is
smaller they
are exchanged. The above number got iscompared with the previous
number on top
of it and exchanged if the above number issmaller than the previous.
This goes
on till the least number reaches the top. In a similarfashion second
least
number is also found out. This goes on till all the field is
sorted.Algorithm
Complexity analysis is done by ascertaining, in the number of
comparisons in the value of components nIn a general case of
BS used in
the first step of the Algorithm provided, for N-city TSP,The number of
comparisons=n + (n-1)+�+1 x nnn= n x n2� n( 1+2+�..+n)nFrom this we
see
that the algorithm grows faster than a n2and is of complexity o(n2)
nnnen log
n111244399and so on.The table above shows that nn= en log n, where log
n is the
upper bound and o(n logn).This shows that the n-city tour and it's
subsidiary
the 5-city tour algorithm turns to be ofexponential time complexity
and hence NP
complete when Bubble Sort is employed. Thisis like Exhaustive
search.The minimal
cost of the traverse is found from Table 1 to be 2100 from all
traverses
withCochin(C) as starting city and Pune(P) as the destination.Quick
SortNow
Quick Sort (QS-Figure 3, pp 5) is used instead of Bubble Sort in the
first step
of theminimal traverse algorithm given above. QS is faster algorithm
but it has
its problemwhich is overcome when it is done like that of sorting a
TelephoneDirectory for faster convergence. The numbers should be
arranged in
close ranges beforethe sort like that of a Telephone directory. QS
consists of
marking the top and bottomelements and choosing a Pivot element which
is the mid
point element of the arrayelements. Thus the elements are divided into
two parts
top part and bottom part (Caveat: The elements to the top of the pivot
should be
smaller than the elements to the bottom ofthe pivot. This is a
standard practice
when using Quick Sort to make it effective for fasterconvergence.).
Now take the
top part exchange the top and pivot if pivot is smaller thanthe top.
Again
divide the top part into two parts by finding the midpoint of the top
part.Of
this top part exchange the top and midpoint if midpoint is smaller
than the top.
If thereis no more elements then come to the bottom part of this and
exchange
the midpoint element and the pivot if pivot is smaller than the
midpoint
element. If there are more
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 4
> 4
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 5
> 5
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 6
> 6elements then before exchanging the bottom part the new top part got is
divided againinto two parts and the top and bottom of it is sorted as
above
before sorting the bottompart of the first division. Thus after
sorting the top
part of initial division in a similar waythe bottom part of the
initial division
is also sorted. To put it simply the sorting is carriedout by dividing
and
exchanging which is nested deep as the number of elements increase.As
for Bubble
Sort the algorithm complexity for Quick Sort is found to be,n 
n =
nnsince there are n comparisons in each field and there are n such
fields. See
table 1 forreference. See table below.nn log n1021.333.2and so on.This
shows
that Quick sort has complexity O(n)  O (n log n). The
algorithm grow
fasterthan (n log n) this being the lower bound being the information
mass.
Table above showsthat (n log n) gives the actual comparisons in Quick
Sort. For
example for list of 1 city,- 0comparison, for 2 cities 1 comparison,
for 3
cities 3 comparisons and so forth given by (nlog n).Algorithm with O(n
log n)
complexity is P type algorithm since n log n is a polynomial..The
resulting
minimal cost using the minimal cost algorithm which turns out to be P
typeO(n
log n), when Quick Sort is used instead of Bubble Sort with starting
city
asCochin(C) and destination Pune(P), turns out again to be 2100 from
all the
possibletraverses .It can be proved that,Let K be the Largest bit
pattern NP or
P possible.kNumber of such patterns =  !
=2Taking n bit
cluster out of all this possible clusters,Probability is taken for
each stream
of bit NP or P to give it a unique identity.k*Probability of 1such n-
bit cluster
=1 / (  ! )=2Bounds start at 2 since that is
the least
number required to form a combination., moreovermore than 1 bit is
always
required.Probability of 1 bit out of the n bits in the cluster
is,Taking Joint
Probabilities,kk(0.5+ 1/n - 0.5 x 1/n)(1/(  !) - (0.5+
1/n - 0.5
x 1/n)( 1/(  !) =2=2
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 7
> 70.5(n-1) , for Large n this converges.nThe proof starts with description of a
theoretical Computer.Let  be a language. Then L 
 be a
language in x  L halts for the Computer, then x
 {{x}}
 L halts in Polynomial time.Let y 
halts in
Polynomial time or P only if y {{x}} or has counterparts which
are {{x}} in which case it is Non deterministic Polynomial
time or NP OR
it has delimiteror language K which may or may not be  L.Let
PS , *And NPK,
* is delimiter for S's and  delimiter for K's,
S and K
are sets of symbol sequences.Usually an Automaton is defined as a 5-
tuple, but
here for simplicity I choose a 2-tuple.MNP E(h)
 ,
NP H(h)Where, NP E(h) = Exception Halts or
Dead Drop
HaltsNP H(h) = Normal Halts which may be dead drop halted.NP
NP
 (NP/P)  P(NP/P)  P(P)
=
P(P)NP NP   P(NP/P) 
P(P), all being HaltsTaking Bayesian ProbabilitiesP
(PNP) =
P(NP/P)P(P) = P(X) space iff P( NP/P) P(P)P(NP)
P(NP/P) =
P(P/NP)P(NP)P(P)If 1/β is the probability of occurrence of NP and
P thenthe
above two equations becomes 1/β provingP(PNP) = P(NP/P)(P/
NP) =
(NP/P)Also, both NP and P occurs at a probability
1/(2п.√(1+x2))Additionally functional equality can be
proved between
NP and P,Problem(P), Bubble sort(B), Quick sort(Q), sorted table(T),
result(R)and Search(S)Now,BSQSP => T => R and P => T => RHere, S(B(P) )
= S(Q(P))
= Rie; Q(P) = B(P) where,B(P) is NP and Q(P)=P which are proved to be
functionally equivalent through theirproducing the same sort
results.ie; (P/NP)
= (NP/P) .This is true since the speed of the Computer should not be
taken as a
constraint totheir equality. This not only proves that all NP's belong
to P but
also that we can findP solutions that can be determined on the
Computer. This
proves the results of theBayesian equation.It can be uniquely
identified by log
n in P(X) which later on is the empiricalprocess to
verify the
proof. n is the numerical value of the P stress.H is Halt
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 8
> 8X = log n and B(X)=Binary(X)Then, H=NP/P=B(X)P H PreflexiveP H NP/P = NP/P H
Psymmetric(P H X)  (X H NP/P)  P H NP/
Ptransitivewhere, P and
NP/P  B binary numbers and XI or R or N or B binary
numberswhich
can be uniquely identified by the numerical value log n as explained
earlier.Here, their existence is not required in the same class of
numbers
considering theunique nature of the phenomenon and problem. Also in
the TSP
problem solved NPand P produce the same result 2100 and so this can be
taken as
the representative casefor all NP, P problems, where NP/P and P halts
for
smaller n.Where all NP/P = NPIt is noticed that the relation between P
(NP/P) and
P(P) is an equivalence relation, H-Halt being the Relation. We also
see that
P(NP/P) is one to one and onto P(P)making it an Equivalence
Class.So
that MP(H) instead of
MNP
E(h) , NP H(h) as assumed
earlier.Note:Let
 be a Language and *in it NP.Let w be a Language in
y*and xw  then, from
above,y
 wkwhere k  
y <
 max w2The double
brazes
convention is forfeited here to comply with the description of
theproblem given
on www.claymath.org.Let # be a relational operatorAs per the above
results,y # x
where # may or may not be a part of This shows all possible
combinations
of 0's and 1's are  PNP = PRefer to Figure 4 for visualization
of the
phenomenon.It can be empirically verified as follows. If n is the
numerical
value of the bit pattern then,Log n gives the individual
identification of the
bit pattern out of all the  bit patternswhere n 
. This
is also the growth rate from a single bit from numerical 0. So whenP
(NP) is
associated with P(P) it is identified as Log n.Also,P(P){P}P(NP){P}P
(NP/P){P}The
proof given above shows that{P(NP/P)}  {P(P)}With Exception
Halts or
Dead drop Halts taken into consideration{P(NP)}  {P(P)}
 NP=PNP
= PIn the example of TSP we proved NP result =2100 and P results =
2100 so
thatNP = P, like when x =a and y=a then x = y.Also, both NP and Pare
Polynomials.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 9
> 9Also both NP and PThere cannot be a contradiction in this because always a
Brute force method isavailable to solve NP's which are P itself as per
the proof
by Baysein but the speed of the Computers may be a limiting factor,
until new
Computers based on new materialfor speed is manufactured in
future.ConclusionContention shows us that Algorithm which turns into
either P
type or NP type accordingto the choice of the sort algorithm employed
produces
the same resulting costs 2100,proving the general case of NP =P. The
special
case is always dead drop halted. Sinceboth the general and special
case of NP
halts, and the Turing Machine comes to halt by
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 10
> 10doing so all NP's has to be subset of P type algorithms. All NP type
Algorithms thusformed are thus part of the P type or is partnered
through a
Relational operator # whichmay or may not be part of P.The problem
description
directs us only to prove that y x2
*.The
Bayesian proves that all NP occurring at P is a subset of all P itself
provingthe above requirement(Italics in the proof). P=NP numerically
(probability
and result),functionallyan relationally. Clay Millennium problem
remain
resolvedNP = Pin all the casesTuring's Halting problem stipulates
either a
Turing machine that halts or run indefinitelywithout halting for a
given set of
symbols. Here we proved that all symbols stops theTuring
Machine.Turing's
Halting Problem remains resolved.To find P type of Algorithms for all
NP type
Algorithms not yet found out can be worththe while. Exception Halts
are of no
consequence.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 11
> 11C*533H *2100B *864M
*1552PCB533HP548BM331MB331PH548CM681HB562BC533MC681PB835CH1095HM688BH562MH688PM1\
166CP1221HC1095BP835MP1166PC1221Table 1
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 12
> 12Acknowledgment: Late Dr. K.R. Ramakrishna and my Colleagues there, EE Dept.,
IISC,Bangalore for giving me opportunity to work with computers,
Claude Shannon
for hisInformation Theory works. Prof. Thathachar V.L of
IISc,Bangalore and his
Ph.D students for leading me into Algorithm complexityanalysis when I
attended
their departmental seminar on the same subject in 1982. GregoryChaitin
for his
article `The limits of reason' in Scientific American, Indian Edition
ofMarch
2006, which ultimately made me aware of Clay Maths problems and all
mycolleagues, friends and Professors who supported me in my endeavor
in
understandingphilosophies of my multiple professions. S.E Goodman and
S.T
Hedetniemi for theirbook `Introduction to the design and analysis of
Algorithm'
published by McGraw Hill,for introducing me to the fundamentals and
possibilities and impossibilities. Last but notthe lease the Google
search sight
linux.Wku for a quick review of Sorts after a leave ofprobably 20 odd
years when
Mr. Chaitin's article led me back into it again one more time.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 13
> 13Mathew Cherian B.E, M.B.A(Western Michigan.)1-B7 Penta Queen, B1
BlockPadivattom, Cochin 682024, Kerala, India. Email: imag94@...
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 14
> 14
>
Great Job. The above message is from the inbox of Martin Musatov. It
was
delivered to marty....@gmail.com. Note that scri...@yahoo.com is
also an
email address I have had since 2005. (founder of the
board:pequ...@yahoogroups.com).--Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
> David C. Ullrich <dullr...@sprynet.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > If you want help you have to make a readable copy of the
> > proof available.
>
> Er, guys?
>
> This is the same guy who announced his proof of P=NP on Apr. 26,
>
> That announcement happened to be a repost of a 1999 April Fool's
> joke by a different poster (or a different alias, but I doubt it).
>
> He was having us on then. Surely, it is obvious he's having us on
> again.
>
> --
> "So why talk [about my factoring method] out on Usenet? Because it's a
> highly public place so I'm unlikely to disappear[...] You people are
> my protection. [...] You may be what's keeping me free and walking out
> in the open air." -- James S. Harris, theory guy on the edge.
Clearly now you have seen the light: P==NP is more than a repository.
Sometimes you have to use the kitchen sink, too.
Martin Musatov
> Martin Musatov wrote:
> > Please refrain from cussing. Thank you. This is a site for
> > constructive work.
>
> You must be new here.
> Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
> tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
I would appreciate a welcome then. The academic community has treated
me with the respect of a janitor. They have been the cruelest
experience I have ever experienced in my 30 years of life.
Martin Musatov
wrote:
> > I trust you will not be particularly disrupted in
> > your
> > pursuits if I start ignoring you from now on, so I
> > will.
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > -- m
>
>
I do not even know what a Markov model is. My last name is Musatov, my
dad is named Victor Musatov. He does not have a middle name because he
is Russian. I once bought a painting from a website. The painting was
called "Spring" by Victor Borisov-Musatov. I first read about the
artist here: http://www.abcgallery.com/B/borisov-musatov/borisov-musatov.html
Ironically my dad too has: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyphosis. But
his is from a condition called: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankylosing_spondylitis.
I love him very much. I spent $100 getting that picture framed from
Michael's in Burbank, California. I believe the year was 2005. My
middle name is also Michael. Michael Schultz is my Godfather. He is
currently battling cancer and one of the key motivators in my proof
P=NP. He and my young niece who is hard of hearing. She is such an
angel. I want these advances in health care and compassion much more
than any cryptography. My ATM card is useless without the love of my
family. It does not matter how much money there is in my account.
Please note: I wrote the above as an experiment as now I am seeing
there are bounds or edges to complexity where only certain words and
messages appear at certain times and they depend on variables which I
do not fully but am starting to understand.--Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
>
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
>
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> > Thank you,
>
> > Martin Musatov
> > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
>
And you see now this old stuff is popping up again.> > Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
is not wrong the assumption is someone is dancing around admitting it
is right.--Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
wrote:
talk to me so poorly and with such anger?
Martin Musatov
>
> [...]
>
> > If you want help you have to make a readable copy of the
> > proof available.
>
> Er, guys?
>
> This is the same guy who announced his proof of P=NP on Apr. 26,
>
> That announcement happened to be a repost of a 1999 April Fool's
> joke by a different poster (or a different alias, but I doubt it).
>
> He was having us on then. Surely, it is obvious he's having us on
> again.
>
> --
> "So why talk [about my factoring method] out on Usenet? Because it's a
> highly public place so I'm unlikely to disappear[...] You people are
> my protection. [...] You may be what's keeping me free and walking out
> in the open air." -- James S. Harris, theory guy on the edge.
"So why talk [about my factoring method] out on Usenet? Because it's
a
highly public place so I'm unlikely to disappear[...] You people are
my protection. [...] You may be what's keeping me free and walking
out
in the open air." -- James S. Harris, theory guy on the edge.
does not seem right what you are doing here, playing hide and seek the
truth.]--Martin Musatov
Victor Eijkhout
> How does that have to do with whether or not my proof is correct?
In theory it shouldn't. In practice, your use of defective products
makes it impossible to read, and therefore assess, your proof.
Jesse F. Hughes
> Martin Musatov <marty....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How does that have to do with whether or not my proof is correct?
>
> In theory it shouldn't. In practice, your use of defective products
> makes it impossible to read, and therefore assess, your proof.
I'm pretty sure that this whole thread is a fairly amusing troll.
In fact, I think that putting up a purposely unreadable paper and
inviting comments (while pretending that the paper is clearly
presented) is pretty damned clever.
--
"Sexual love makes of the loved person an Object of appetite; as soon
as that appetite has been stilled, the person is cast aside as one
casts away a lemon which has been sucked dry." -- Immanuel Kant
"Squeeze my lemon til the juice runs down my leg." -- Robert Johnson
Han de Bruijn
> s...@sig.for.address (Victor Eijkhout) writes:
>
>>Martin Musatov <marty....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>How does that have to do with whether or not my proof is correct?
>>
>>In theory it shouldn't. In practice, your use of defective products
>>makes it impossible to read, and therefore assess, your proof.
>
> I'm pretty sure that this whole thread is a fairly amusing troll.
>
> In fact, I think that putting up a purposely unreadable paper and
> inviting comments (while pretending that the paper is clearly
> presented) is pretty damned clever.
Always be prepared for the impossible, though.
Han de Bruijn
Chip Eastham
Hi, Martin:
No, it means that you have posted
rambling, incoherent nonsense. It
is not "even wrong" because only
statements fall under the logical
dichotomy of being true or false,
and you write with no reasoned
connection with the P vs. NP
problem.
Hence your "proof" is not even
wrong. You might as well have
copied a poem about birds or
the ingredients of a cake.
regards, chip
Jesse F. Hughes
Surely it is not impossible that P=NP will be proved. It is extremely
unlikely, but not impossible, that the proof will be announced on
sci.math.
It is pretty damned obvious that Martin is just funning. After all,
his first post on the topic was a *repost* of someone else's April
Fool's joke from 1999.
--
"[T]he Cantorian pseudomathematicians are defending a religion, and
they really can't see what monsters they have become. What the
Cantorians are doing is nothing less than a crime against
humanity. What they are doing is evil." -- David Petry, victim.
VMCM1905
"Martin Michael Musatov" <marty....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
> Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks he
has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
Mensanator
> "Martin Michael Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
>
> > Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
>
> Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks he
> has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
I don't see how that follows, but yes, he thinks he's solved
the Travelling Salesman Problem.
VMCM1905
"Mensanator" <mensa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:a26c01fd-835e-469c...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
It follows, but in a convoluted manner.
As to the OP's question, there are many sites that discuss JSH as a crank.
When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced?
Mensanator
> "Mensanator" <mensana...@aol.com> wrote in message
He didn't. What he did was declare the topic FLT to be
"off the table", i.e., he will no longer entertain any
further discussion on it.
> and how was he finally convinced?
He wasn't. He still lists his proof of FLT as one of
his "accomplishments".
Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov a écrit :
> Sometimes you have to use the kitchen sink, too. I actually wrote this: 6P=NP. This is not a joke and no. I am not funning: %P==NP.]
Martin Musatov
Victor Eijkhout a écrit :
What products are defective? 6P=NP. --MartinMusatov
Martin Musatov
VMCM1905 a écrit :
> When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced? For the record I have bo idea who JSH or what FLT is. ~~~~MMM~~~~|NNN
VMCM1905
"Martin Musatov" <marty....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:00064f99-ab12-4c0e...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
VMCM1905 a �crit :
> "Mensanator" <mensa...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:a26c01fd-835e-469c...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 10:44?pm, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Martin Michael Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
> >
> > > Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
> >
> > Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks
> > he
> > has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
>
> >I don't see how that follows, but yes, he thinks he's solved
> >the Travelling Salesman Problem.
>
> It follows, but in a convoluted manner.
> As to the OP's question, there are many sites that discuss JSH as a crank.
>
> When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced? For the
> record I have bo idea who JSH or what FLT is. ~~~~MMM~~~~|NNN
www.google.com "how to use google"
"JSH FLT"
"James Harris" Fermat's Last Theorem
Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov a écrit :
Note: directions=code=compute_results.IIcann.Internic.cern.ch.np
+until_publish=proof=location=Internet. Seek: reprints of the complete
proof across all major media portals including http://blogs.nytime.com
*n http://www.drudgereport.com. Note to editor: swing by Musatov's
portal http://MeAmI.org and note the WikiWikiWeb and blog. Ties story
to protein folding and cures for cancer. «}DoGoogleSearch{}continue:
publish results: quote: author's name="Martin
Musatov&"value=P=NP.Recompute.Compile.Java[[[[##>9"*9"*44s+class.]
Print values: creates new: >>>>>>>[[http//MeAmI.org/wiki/?#var#?#**#_
+@/New=php.phpwikphpwphwkphphphpwikiphwikphweb.func{VBUILDO>}
deploy.agent=deploy.array.=encode.matriz.cadhu_decombobulator.bis.blackberry.net=forward
+march.html+html+html+html__avoid-halt-
continue_waitw=wPhpbbphp.define÷d=infinite-I
Martin Musatov
> board:pequ...@yahoogroups.com).--Martin Musatov: As to languages and formulations, the language of questions must be finite arithmetic, where the proper question is; "What is the true fundamental mathematical problem with capitalism? Or any other form of heiarchical organization, of any other possible non-destructive social contracts?"P=NP i.e., Proof=NonPossibles, add em up, and choose what's left___the possibles...It's just a simple combinatoric process, existing from the earliest of written and recorded languages...All conversions of unknowns are achieved by isomorphically changing/updating psychologies/semantics to arithmetic logics through their global pragmatic uses. --Martin Musatov. P.S. Special Thanks to my friend and mentor Lloyd G.
Martin Musatov
wrote:
> Here is a "script" I ran. It explains itself to the careful study:
> |©2009 MeAmI.org:"Hello Universe!"l©2009 Martin M. Musatov
> Ipv6=octet:"Michael"=M. See prior message. Repeat.”=(k)
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
> From: marty.musa...@gmail.com
>
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 05:08:02
> To: <rkm...@yahoo.com>; <i...@MeAmI.org>; <marty.musa...@gmail.com>
>
> Cc: <m...@vzw.blackberry.com>
> Subject: Fw: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
>
> Here is a proof. I did not reply from MeAmI. The server did. That is A.I. The "Hello Martin," must have been generated by a script. Perhaps the legendary "Hello World" or maybe even Wordpress.org with its "Hello Dolly" script.
>
> I think this is so amazing. Please reply.
>
> The rkm...@yahoo.com may be interesting if we assign variables to the "hello" stream.
>
> Just go along with this. You do not need to reply with any technical information as it is the code that will be generated later by the MeAmI.org server I am interested in.
>
> 0=Yes
> 1=No
>
> l©2009 Martin Musatov: stream: no octet:p=|pl©2009 Googlel©2009 MeAmI.org
> ------Original Message------
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
> To: marty.musa...@gmail.com
> Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
> Sent: May 10, 2009 9:37 PM
>
> This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
>
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>
> i...@meami.org
>
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect. Learn more athttp://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=7720
> [mail1.byetcluster.com. (5): Connection dropped]
>
> ----- Original message -----
>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Received: by 10.100.12.1 with SMTP id 1mr7003228anl.107.1241745832189; Thu, 07
> May 2009 18:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
> In-Reply-To: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
> References: <200905080121...@www.yarr.ca>
> Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 18:23:51 -0700
> Message-ID: <cf9a0a8b0905071823o769...@mail.gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: This is a test
> From: Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com>
> To: "MeAmI.org" <i...@meami.org>
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
>
> --0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> P=NP. Martin
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, MeAmI.org <i...@meami.org> wrote:
>
> > Hello Martin,
>
> ----- Message truncated -----
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthodox proof
> > P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
>
> >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln575821
> > 0-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-1521282711575821
> > 0PDF_HI0001.pdf
>
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else.
> > My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on
> > how to strengthen
> > it.
>
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this
> > experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I
> > used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more
> > broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic
> > result.
>
>
> > Martin Musatov
> > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
>
> l©2009 MeAmI.org:"Hello Universe!"l©2009 Martin M. Musatov
> Ipv6=octet:"Michael"=M. See prior message. Repeat.”=(k)
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: marty.musa...@gmail.com
>
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 05:08:02
> To: <rkm...@yahoo.com>; <i...@MeAmI.org>; <marty.musa...@gmail.com>
> Cc: <m...@vzw.blackberry.com>
> Subject: Fw: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
>
> Here is a proof. I did not reply from MeAmI. The server did. That is A.I. The "Hello Martin," must have been generated by a script. Perhaps the legendary "Hello World" or maybe even Wordpress.org with its "Hello Dolly" script.
>
> I think this is so amazing. Please reply.
>
> The rkm...@yahoo.com may be interesting if we assign variables to the "hello" stream.
>
> Just go along with this. You do not need to reply with any technical information as it is the code that will be generated later by the MeAmI.org server I am interested in.
>
> 0=Yes
> 1=No
>
> l©2009 Martin Musatov: stream: no octet:p=|pl©2009 Googlel©2009 MeAmI.org
> ------Original Message------
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
> To: marty.musa...@gmail.com
> Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
> Sent: May 10, 2009 9:37 PM
>
> This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
>
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>
> i...@meami.org
>
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect. Learn more athttp://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=7720
> [mail1.byetcluster.com. (5): Connection dropped]
>
> ----- Original message -----
>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Received: by 10.100.12.1 with SMTP id 1mr7003228anl.107.1241745832189; Thu, 07
> May 2009 18:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
> In-Reply-To: <200905080121.n481LtF01...@www.yarr.ca>
> References: <200905080121.n481LtF01...@www.yarr.ca>
> Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 18:23:51 -0700
> Message-ID: <cf9a0a8b0905071823o7697d444x32a91849334a1...@mail.gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: This is a test
> From: Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com>
> To: "MeAmI.org" <i...@meami.org>
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
>
> --0016e644ddea3aa19304695c7bbb
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> P=NP. Martin
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, MeAmI.org <i...@meami.org> wrote:
>
> > Hello Martin,
>
> ----- Message truncated -----
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
P=NP Proof Published at CERN - sci.math | Google Groups
... the code that will be generated later by the MeAmI.org server I am
interested in. ... to the careful study: l©2009 MeAmI.org:"Hello
Universe!"l©2009 Martin M. ...groups.google.nr/group/sci.math/msg/
6cf04dc7e0b02403?dmode=source - Cached
Martin Musatov
> On May 9, 6:00 am, A N Niel <ann...@nym.alias.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <b36eb4ca-cbed-41b3-b369-4b0f559a1...@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > > published onCERNpreprints.
>
> > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> > > 1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf
>
> > > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > > it.
>
> > > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
>
> > > Thank you,
>
> > > Martin Musatov
> > > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
> > by you, or bungled by IMAJAM (orCERN) when it was put on-line?
>
> It was done by me the uploading was intentional and experimental and
> deliberate as to the current state. Each step along the way was not.
> i.e. the parsing from Google docs and the side left margin vertical
> numbering done by my upload at Oxford where just happenstance but they
> intrigued be by the uniqueness of the nature of the result. How does
> the machine know in the randomness of everything against these
> equations to count to 10 at very specific intervals against equations.
> That sounds like A.I. to me. Or could there be something more to this?
> Could there be a more profound less worldly cause?
Deterministic verification phase, checks that the guess is a solution,
returning true or false, or looping infinitely.... more ». By Martin
Musatov - May 13 ...MeAmI.org - search results
Martin Musatov
labeling it as such? --Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
> "Martin Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:00064f99-ab12-4c0e...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> VMCM1905 a écrit :
>
>
>
> > "Mensanator" <mensana...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:a26c01fd-835e-469c...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > On May 11, 10:44?pm, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Martin Michael Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > messagenews:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
>
> > > > Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
>
> > > Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks
> > > he
> > > has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
>
> > >I don't see how that follows, but yes, he thinks he's solved
> > >the Travelling Salesman Problem.
>
> > It follows, but in a convoluted manner.
> > As to the OP's question, there are many sites that discuss JSH as a crank.
>
> > When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced? For the
> > record I have bo idea who JSH or what FLT is. ~~~~MMM~~~~|NNN
>
> www.google.com"how to use google"
>
> "JSH FLT"
> "James Harris" Fermat's Last Theorem
>
> http://www.crank.net/harris.html
draw the comparison. --Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
create a FLT/JSH topic off thread I would appreciate it. (Given the
sensitive nature of this material)--Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
>
> news:00064f99-ab12-4c0e...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> VMCM1905 a écrit :
>
>
>
> > "Mensanator" <mensana...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:a26c01fd-835e-469c...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > On May 11, 10:44?pm, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Martin Michael Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > messagenews:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
>
> > > > Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
>
> > > Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks
> > > he
> > > has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
>
> > >I don't see how that follows, but yes, he thinks he's solved
> > >the Travelling Salesman Problem.
>
> > It follows, but in a convoluted manner.
> > As to the OP's question, there are many sites that discuss JSH as a crank.
>
> > When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced? For the
> > record I have bo idea who JSH or what FLT is. ~~~~MMM~~~~|NNN
>
> www.google.com"how to use google"
>
> "JSH FLT"
> "James Harris" Fermat's Last Theorem
>
> http://www.crank.net/harris.html
Martin Musatov
>--Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
>
>
Martin Musatov
> On May 15, 3:37 pm, MartinMusatov<marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 11, 7:32 am, Chip Eastham <hardm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > On May 10, 6:09 pm, MartinMusatov<marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > victor_meldrew_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > > > > > > Also here are some additional related results: 1) Access to
> > > > > > > Photograph:http://documents.cern.ch/cgi-bin/setlink?base=PHO&categ=photo-tsic&id...
> > > > > > > 2)Conversions Information: Portable Document Format:http://
> > > > > > > documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/hep-lat/9612/9612008.pdf
>
> > > > > > Wgat have these to do with your drivel?
>
> > > > > > > > Does that mean "bogus"?.
>
> > > > > > > No, you are welcome to try to disprove it.
>
>
> > > > Does not even wrong mean right? If not what does it mean? If something
> > > > is not wrong the assumption is someone is dancing around admitting it
> > > > is right.--MartinMusatov
>
> > > Hi, Martin:
>
> > > No, it means that you have posted
> > > rambling, incoherent nonsense. It
> > > is not "even wrong" because only
> > > statements fall under the logical
> > > dichotomy of being true or false,
> > > and you write with no reasoned
> > > connection with the P vs. NP
> > > problem.
>
> > > Hence your "proof" is not even
> > > wrong. You might as well have
> > > copied a poem about birds or
> > > the ingredients of a cake.
>
> > > regards, chip
> > > Hi Chip, Please again, please be specific with your feedback instead of just bland labels without any logic or math to back up your opinion or claim.
>
> - Show quoted text -
P=NP Proof Published at CERN I agree with the proof. I cannot deny
it by the evidence shown it solves several
NP-complete problems referenced here: Does not even wrong mean right?
If not
what does it mean? If something is not wrong the assumption is someone
is
dancing around admitting it is right.--Martin Musatov Hi, Martin: No,
it means
3:40pm by Martin Musatov - 107 messages - 15 authors
http://groups.google.as/group/sci.math/search?group=sci.math&q=musatov+agree
Please address:
VMCM1905
On May 13, 8:10 am, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Martin Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:00064f99-ab12-4c0e...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
> > "Mensanator" <mensana...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:a26c01fd-835e-469c...@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > On May 11, 10:44?pm, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Martin Michael Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > messagenews:29921474.87652.1242020...@nitrogen.mathforum.org...
>
> > > > Who is "JSH"?--Martin Musatov
>
> > > Oh please don't tell me Harris has moved from being a crank who thinks
> > > he
> > > has a simple proof of FLT to a crank who thinks he can prove P vs NP?
>
> > >I don't see how that follows, but yes, he thinks he's solved
> > >the Travelling Salesman Problem.
>
> > It follows, but in a convoluted manner.
> > As to the OP's question, there are many sites that discuss JSH as a
> > crank.
>
> > When did JSH give up on FLT, and how was he finally convinced? For the
> > record I have bo idea who JSH or what FLT is. ~~~~MMM~~~~|NNN
>
> www.google.com"how to use google"
>
> "JSH FLT"
> "James Harris" Fermat's Last Theorem
>
> http://www.crank.net/harris.html
Thank you for explaining, please cite specific examples from which to
draw the comparison. --Martin Musatov
No need for me to do your research for you.
VMCM1905
On May 13, 8:10 am, "VMCM1905" <VMCM1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Martin Musatov" <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:00064f99-ab12-4c0e...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
<SNIP>
>
> http://www.crank.net/harris.html
>Thanks for explaining. Please refrain from referencing the term "crank" as
>it is non-constructive and cruel. --Martin Musatov
It is a perfect descriptor. Widely understood and acknowledged. I shall
continue to use it where applicable.
Martin Musatov
> On May 9, 6:00 am, A N Niel <ann...@nym.alias.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <b36eb4ca-cbed-41b3-b369-4b0f559a1...@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> > > 1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf
> >
> > > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
> >
> >
> *A N Niel: the actual culprit believe it or not was Google docs
> uploading a .txt file converting to .pdf which created the in and out
> character/equations on the left side of the page. The vertical
> numbering appeared when I attempted to upload a proof a manuscript
> system. It looked very sturdy and well-enforced so I tried to throw it
> up against the CERN server and see if it woulds stick and it did. I
> then began to experiment with other "geometric" databases:
> A first example of which can be found here:
> *http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164207/export/xm
> note: no missing "L" there...
> and:
> *http://documents.cern.ch/photo/photo-tsic/icon-dfbx-2009-001.gif
> a neat picture I used in developing my theory. My interests began in
> geometry and then shifted into numerical analysis and prime numbers so
> P==NP was my way to reconcile all of this. When I saw the error Google
> Docs generated I began to wonder if we could define functions
> pertaining to numerical analysis not by their presence but by their
> absence, and more specifically the geometry of the space that makes up
> that absence. After all as complicated as numbers can be we only have
> 10 plus a zero. In the end this was the shape, or an example of it in
> binary to which I was able to parse two sets of data readable and
> absent from one document:
> ********************************************************************************************
> NOTE: The Google Docs parsing began generating content vertically as
> it ran the equations I had prepared in a Microsoft Word file, then ctl
> +c, ctl+v into .txt file. IT RAN RIGHT THROUGH THE REFERENCES BEFORE
> SEALING OFF THE SOLUTION JUST THIS SIDE OF INFINITY it was pretty
> neat:
> *********************************************************************************************
> So indeed my proof stands correct and I hope it makes its way over to
> Mr. Cook for his comments;!
> *********************************************************************************************
> ----------Here is a sample parsing from a "Polynomial Time
> Algorithm"-------------------------
> MARTIN M. MUSATOV: m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net
> An Open Address to Mr. Stephen A. Cook: sacook [at] cs [dot] toronto
> [dot] edu
> STATEMENT OF THE SOLUTION
> This solution to P versus NP explains how every language accepted by
> some non deterministic algorithm in polynomial time can be accepted by
> some (deterministic) algorithm in polynomial time. To define the
> solution it is formally it is necessary to observe the model of a
> computer, or Turing machine and process information in real-time as it
> is received as a computable function or linear stream.
> By this declaration, formally, the class P contains the indecision
> problems
> P =
> .
> ...
> .
> N.
> ...
> .
> P
> From this point, we can continue the expansion:
> The area of a circle [2]: . ..=....2
> The binomial theorem [3]: ..+.. ..= ..
> ..
> ........-..
> ..
> ..=0
> Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];.
> 1+.. ..=1+
> ....
> 1!
> +
> .. ..-1 ..22!
> +.
> Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:.
> .. .. =..0+ ....cos
> ......
> ..
> +....sin
> ......
> ..
> 8
> ..=1
> The Pythagorean Formula [6]:. ..2+..2=..2
> 1 Arfken, G. "Special Coordinate Systems--Rectangular Cartesian
> Coordinates." §2.3 in
> Mathematical Methods for Physicists, 3rd ed. Orlando, FL: Academic
> Press, pp. 94-95, 1985.
> 2 Richmond, Bettina (1999-01-12). "Area of a Circle". Western Kentucky
> University.
> Retrieved on 2007-11-04.
> 3Amulya Kumar Bag. Binomial Theorem in Ancient India. Indian J.History
> Sci.,1:68-74,1966.
> 4 "Neither Newton nor Leibniz - The Pre-History of Calculus and
> Celestial Mechanics in
> Medieval Kerala". MAT 314. Canisius College. Retrieved on
> 2006-07-09.
> 5William E. Boyce and Richard C. DiPrima, Elementary Differential
> Equations and Boundary
> Value Problems, Eighth edition. John Wiley & Sons,
> Inc., New Jersey, 2005. ISBN 0-471-43338-1
> 6Bell, John L., The Art of the Intelligible: An Elementary Survey of
> Mathematics in its
> Conceptual Development, Kluwer, 1999. ISBN 0-7923-5972-
> 0.
> 7Heaton, H. (1896) A Method of Solving Quadratic Equations, American
> Mathematical
> Monthly 3(10), 236-237.
> Through the Quadratic Equation [7]:.
> ..=
> -..± ..2-4....
> 2..
> Page 2 of 3
> http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/imamat
> Manuscripts submitted to (i)The IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics(/i)
> To be succeed by a modified Taylor Series Expansion [8];.
> ....=1+
> ..
> 1!
> +
> ..22!
> +
> ..33!
> +.,-8<..<8 ∞
> m [dot] mm [at] vzw [dot] blackberry [dot] net
PROOF: http://knowledgerush.com/kr/jsp/db/board.jsp?id=3947 I posted
on this website below a post subject: P=NP
Text: ~~~~Proof.
Here is the post it generated through Wikipedia interface. For any who
claim my proof is not true, I challenge you to explain how the below
code was created:
P=NP marty....@gmail.com - April 1st, 2009 - (view article)
Martin Michael Musatov. ~~~~ proof. {{process header | title =
Requests for adminship | section = | previous = ←[[Meta:Index/Requests
and proposals|Requests and proposals]] | next = [[/Archives|Archives]]
→ | shortcut = [[WM:RFA]] | notes = This page hosts requests for
requesting administrator access on the Meta-Wiki; '''for requesting
administrator access on any other wiki, please see the [[Meta:Index/
Requests and proposals|index of request and proposal pages]]''', where
a [[Steward]] can do the job if required. Bureaucrat, checkuser and
bot requests are also made here. Before making a request here, please
see the [[Administrator on Meta#Policy for requesting adminship|
administrator policy]]. Requests should be listed here for '''''at
least''''' seven days; bureaucrats should only close '''''after'''''
this minimum time. Adminship will be granted by a support ratio of at
least 75%. If a request hasn't been addressed by a bureaucrat after a
lengthy period of time, please leave a note at [[Meta:Requests for
help from a sysop or bureaucrat|Requests for help from a sysop or
bureaucrat]]. Requests may be extended, or put on hold by bureaucrats,
pending decision or finding of consensus. Requests for temporary
adminship and bot requests may be less formal and often go for a
shorter duration if consensus becomes clear after only a few days of
discussion. All editors with an account on Meta, at least one active
account on any Wikimedia project, and a link between the two, may
participate in any request and give their opinion of the candidate.
However, more active Meta editors' opinions may be given additional
weight in controversial cases. See below for information on
prerequisites on submitting a request, and how to add a nomination. }}
{{Meta}} ==Information== '''Note that this page is for access on Meta
only'''. See the [[Steward requests/Permissions]] page for adminship/
deadminship requests on other projects. ===Regular adminship===
#Before requesting admin access, please ensure you meet '''all''' of
the minimum criteria: #* Be an administrator, bureaucrat, or checkuser
on a local Wikipedia or related project. #* Have a user page on Meta,
with links to the user pages on other participated projects. This can
state that SUL is activated or be provided via a
[[:Category:Wikimedian matrices|Wiki matrix]] if that is not possible.
#* Have a valid contact address (either a confirmed email address in
preferences, or a valid email address on the user page). #* Are
currently an active contributor on Meta. This is a subjective, not an
objective, measure and there is no official post count. # As Meta has
a cross wiki role admins here are expected to have cross wiki
experience. SUL confirmation or a matrix will mean that editing on
other wikis can be easily seen. It would be expected that those
seeking adminship here would have both reasonable experience here and
on other wikis. # Given the multi lingual nature of Meta, {{tl|user
language}} information will be of use to others. # Place a request on
this page, by transcluding a subpage, for example <nowiki>
{{Meta:Requests for adminship/Example}}</nowiki>. Please put the
newest request on the top. Bear in mind that even if you do meet the
criteria above this does not mean that the community will
automatically approve a request. Please add a minimum ending date to
the election, allowing a full 7 day period from the first timestamp.
===Bureaucratship=== Add your request below under the bureaucratship
section. Please note: * only active administrators can become
bureaucrats, and only after '''6 months''' of '''regular adminship'''
* User is endorsed by two current bureaucrats after he/she nominates
themselves here If you fail any of these requirements, you will not be
assigned the bureaucrat flag. For more information see
[[Meta:Bureaucrats]] ===Other access=== * '''Temporary adminship''':
If you need temporary sysop access for a particular reason (such as
ability to edit protected pages), you may request temporary adminship
on meta. In this case, adminship shall be granted with no requirements
and approval, but the user will promise to limit their activity to the
necessity of what they asked for. Temporary sysop access will normally
be valid for one month. * '''Bot''': Please read the [[bot policy|bot
policy]]. This wiki allows [[bot policy#Global_bots|global bots]] and
[[bot policy#Automatic_approval|automatic approval of certain types of
bots]]; for other bots, add your request below under the bot section,
in the same way as an admin request. * '''Checkuser''': please read
the [[CheckUser policy]] and add your request below under the
checkuser section, in the same way as an admin request. ==Requests for
regular adminship== {{Meta:Requests for adminship/lustiger_seth2}}
==Requests for temporary adminship== {{Meta:Requests for adminship/
2009 Board Election Committee}} ==Requests for bureaucratship
== :''none currently.'' ==Requests for CheckUser access== :''none
currently.'' ==Requests for Oversight access== :''none currently.''
<!-- --> ==Requests for bot flags== :''none currently.'' <!-- Please
create a subpage, and transclude it below, for example:
{{Meta:Requests for bot status/Examplebot}} --> ==See also== *
[[Meta:Administrators]] - Current administrators *
[[Meta:Administrators/confirm]] - Current confirmation discussions *
[[WM:I/RP|Meta:Index/Requests and proposals]] * [[User groups]] -
Information on user groups {{RF}} [[Category:Meta-Wiki requests]]
[[Category:Meta-Wiki administrators]] Reply
Martin Musatov
(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov
01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/
SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar
pages
Martin Musatov wrote:
> On May 9, 12:15 pm, Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
> <mariano.suarezalva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9 mayo, 05:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> > >http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
> >
> > > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > > it.
> >
> > > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
> >
> > that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to
> > computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback
> > on.
> > It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback
> > on.
> >This is what I would like feedback on:SklogWiki - a wiki for statistical ...P = [■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)] N (■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov 01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
> > -- m
>
> familiar with the Internet...a huge+
>
> re: --m: Facts in Proof. Evidence. Evaluation of Evidence, (that is
> very, very, thoughtful and patience of you to react with such
> kindness, care, insight, and attention to detail even when it is
> sometimes painfully obvious the secret missing logical component
> needed to definitively refute any proof: "P=/=NP" and counter it with
> shrewd humanitarian based logic of ages grounded as much in science
> and cold physical studies as it is in morality).
>
> *In polynomial time responses can be handled efficiently if the
> programmer considers possibilities before they occur. Good point, just
> because something you were prepared for occurs does not mean you are
> the cause.--Martin Musatov Critique my method to this statement as it
> satisfies an axiom to prove P==NP.
>
> *Critique my approach in Polynomial time to what we need to get P==NP
> published to claim:
> The Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI) of Cambridge, Massachusetts has
> named seven "Millennium Prize Problems." The Scientific Advisory Board
> of CMI (SAB) selected these problems, focusing on important classic
> questions that have resisted solution over the years. The Board of
> Directors of CMI designated a $7 million prize fund for the solution
> to these problems, with $1 million allocated to each. The Directors of
> CMI, and no other persons or body, have the authority to authorize
> payment from this fund or to modify or interpret these stipulations.
> The Board of Directors of CMI makes all mathematical decisions for
> CMI, upon the recommendation of its SAB.
>
> The SAB of CMI will consider a proposed solution to a Millennium Prize
> Problem if it is a complete mathematical solution to one of the
> problems. (In the case that someone discovers a mathematical
> counterexample, rather than a proof, the question will be considered
> separately as described below.) A proposed solution to one of the
> Millennium Prize Problems may not be submitted directly to CMI for
> consideration.
>
> Before consideration, a proposed solution must be published in a
> refereed mathematics publication of worldwide repute (or such other
> form as the SAB shall determine qualifies), and it must also have
> general acceptance in the mathematics community two years after.
> Following this two-year waiting period, the SAB will decide whether a
> solution merits detailed consideration. In the affirmative case, the
> SAB will constitute a special advisory committee, which will include
> (a) at least one SAB member and (b) at least two non-SAB members who
> are experts in the area of the problem. The SAB will seek advice to
> determine potential non-SAB members who are internationally-recognized
> mathematical experts in the area of the problem. As part of this
> procedure, each component of a proposed solution under consideration
> shall be verified by one or more members of this special advisory
> committee.
>
> The special advisory committee will report within a reasonable time to
> the SAB. Based on this report and possible further investigation, the
> SAB will make a recommendation to the Directors. The SAB may recommend
> the award of a prize to one person. The SAB may recommend that a
> particular prize be divided among multiple solvers of a problem or
> their heirs. The SAB will pay special attention to the question of
> whether a prize solution depends crucially on insights published prior
> to the solution under consideration. The SAB may (but need not)
> recommend recognition of such prior work in the prize citation, and it
> may (but need not) recommend the inclusion of the author of prior work
> in the award.
>
> If the SAB cannot come to a clear decision about the correctness of a
> solution to a problem, its attribution, or the appropriateness of an
> award, the SAB may recommend that no prize be awarded for a particular
> problem. If new information comes to light, the SAB may (but will not
> necessarily) reconsider a negative decision to recommend a prize for a
> proposed solution, but only after an additional two-year waiting
> period following the time that the new information comes to light. The
> SAB has the sole authority to make recommendations to the Directors of
> the CMI concerning the appropriateness of any award and the validity
> of any claim to the CMI Millennium Prize.
> SklogWiki - a wiki for statistical ...P = [■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)] N (■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov 01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
> In the case of the P versus NP problem and the Navier-Stokes problem,
> the SAB will consider the award of the Millennium Prize for deciding
> the question in either direction. In the case of the other problems if
> a counterexample is proposed, the SAB will consider this
> counterexample after publication and the same two-year waiting period
> as for a proposed solution will apply. If, in the opinion of the SAB,
> the counterexample effectively resolves the problem then the SAB may
> recommend the award of the Prize. If the counterexample shows that the
> original problem survives after reformulation or elimination of some
> special case, then the SAB may recommend that a small prize be awarded
> to the author. The money for this prize will not be taken from the
> Millennium Prize Problem fund, but from other CMI funds.
> SklogWiki - a wiki for statistical ...P = [■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)] N (■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov 01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
> Any person who is not a disqualified person (as that term is defined
> in section 4946 of the Internal Revenue Code) in connection with the
> Institute, or a then serving member of the SAB, may receive the
> Millennium Prize.
>
> All decision-making procedures concerning the CMI Millennium Prize
> Problems are private. This includes the deliberations or
> recommendations of any person or persons CMI has used to obtain advice
> on this question. No records of these deliberations or related
> correspondence may be made public without the prior approval of the
> Directors, the SAB, and all other living persons involved, unless
> fifty years time have elapsed after the event in question.
>
> Please send inquiries regarding the Millennium Prize Problems to
> prize.p...@claymath.org.
> SklogWiki - a wiki for statistical ...P = [■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)] N (■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov 01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
> Revision of January 19, 2005
>
> * History
> * Press statement
> * Press reaction
> * Nature article
> * Publication Guidelines
>
> Return to top
>
> --Also, and this is important: if there is anything you see a
> vulnerability in my proof that makes it look like what I said is not
> true, or needs clarifying, perhaps maybe to people who are always nay
> saying, pointing a finger and exclaiming, "You're wrong, here's why!",
> please tell me: "For this to be true, this has to be true." "You have
> accomplished this, so the next step is to do this."
>
> Here are M.I.T.'s accessibility report card: (these are for critiques
> of proof and ongoing discovery utilizes them). I have a little niece
> who is hearing impaired and she is my absolute angel. So this is an
> important one to me.
>
> Navigation
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Current location within the site is shown clearly
> Link to the site's main page is clearly identified
> Major/important parts of the site are directly accessible from the
> main page
> Site map is provided for a large, complex site
> Easy to use Search function is provided, as needed
> Functionality
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Site accommodates novice to expert users
> Functions are clearly labeled
> Essential functions are available without leaving the site
> Plug-ins are used only if they add value
> User Control
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Site reflects user's workflow
> User can cancel any operation
> Clear exit point is provided on every page
> Per-page size is less than 50K, to accommodate slow connections
> All appropriate browsers are supported
> Language and Content
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Important information and tasks are given prominence
> Information of low relevance or rarely used information is not
> included
> Related information or tasks are grouped:
> - on the same page or menu
> - in the same area within a page
> Language is simple, without jargon
> Paragraphs are brief
> Links are concise, expressive, and visible--not buried in text
> Terms are defined
> Online Help and User Guides
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Site is designed to require minimal help and instructions
> Help and instructions, if needed, are easily accessible
> System and User Feedback
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> It is always clear what is happening on the site -- visual hints, etc.
> Users can receive email feedback if necessary
> Users can give feedback via email or a feedback form
> Confirmation screen is provided for form submittal
> All system feedback is timely
> Users are informed if a plug-in or browser version is required
> Each page includes a "last updated" date
> Web Accessibility
> W3C's Tools, Checklist, and Guidelines
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Site follows current web standards; HTML 4.0, Cascading Style Sheets
> (CSS1)
> Cascading Style Sheets are used for layout and style where possible
> Images and animations
> The attribute ALT= is used for images, animations, and other objects
> Image maps
> Site uses client-side map and text for hotspots
> Multimedia
> Site provides captioning and transcripts of audio and descriptions of
> video
> Web versions of PDF documents are provided
> Link labels make sense when read out of context; site avoids such link
> names as "click here"
> Page organization
> Accomplished with headings, lists, and consistent structure
> Graphs and charts
> Summaries are provided for graphs and charts, or the LONGDESC
> attribute is used
> Scripts, applets, & plug-ins
> Alternative content is provided for scripts, applets, and plug-ins in
> case these active features are inaccessible or unsupported
> Frames
> For frames pages, site includes the NOFRAMES option and meaningful
> titles
> Tables
> Line-by-line reading of tables is sensible, and summaries are included
> where possible
> Validation
> Site has been validated using the W3C's HTML Validation Service and
> the Bobby Accessibility Checker
> Site has been tested on a variety of platforms (UNIX, Windows, Mac)
> and browsers (Netscape 3, 4, 6, 7; IE 5, 6; lynx)
> Consistency
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> The same word or phrase is used consistently to describe an item
> Link reflects the title of the page to which it refers
> Browser page title is meaningful and reflects main page heading
> Error Prevention and Correction
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Users can rely on recognition, not memory, for successful use of the
> site
> Site tolerates a reasonable variety of user actions
> Site provides concise instructions for user actions, including entry
> format
> Error messages are visible, not hidden
> Error messages are in plain language
> Error messages describe actions to remedy a problem
> Error messages provide a clear exit point
> Error messages provide contact details for assistance
> Architectural and Visual Clarity
>
> Rating
>
> Explanation for Rating
> Site is organized from the user's perspective
> Site is easily scannable for organization and meaning
> Site design and layout is straightforward and concise
> Site design and layout are redundant only when required for user
> productivity
> White space is sufficient; pages are not too dense
> Unnecessary animation is avoided
> Colors used for visited and unvisited links are easily seen and
> understood
> Bold and italic text is used sparingly
>
> Come to me with challenges and solutions which are reproducible to
> stride towards instead of loathing disproofs based on the certainty of
> Quantum Computers based largely on opinions of those not
>
> Also if you think this thing is ready please critique my approach to
> contacting/involving Stephen Arthur Cook in this proof. I am making
> plans to contact other people who would like to join the "Cause for
> Truth!" P==NP campaign, so any critical comments to energize the
> troops. (oh, in case I forget, here is: sacook [at] cs [dot] toronto
> [dot] edu.
>
> MARTIN M. MUSATOV: m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]netSklogWiki - a wiki for statistical ...P = [■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)] N (■(&⋯&@⋮&⋱&⋮@&⋯&)) P. [[P=NP]through Parallel Tempering --MartinMMusatov 01:11, 24 February 2009 (CET)Martin M. Musatov ..."http://147.96.5.37/SklogWiki/index.php/User:MartinMMusatov" - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 09:18, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof
>
> Does that mean "bogus"?
Martin Musatov
> In article
> <b36eb4ca-cbed-41b3...@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
> Martin Musatov <marty....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > An informal and highly experimental, unorthadox proof P=NP has been
> > published on CERN preprints.
> >
> >
> > http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-1939656818Hwf-
> > 1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf
> >
> > It is mine, and no it is not published anywhere else. My purpose in
> > posting it here is for feedback and suggestions on how to strengthen
> > it.
> >
> > I would specifically, as was my intention with this experiment, like
> > feedback from anyone interested in the methodology I used and
> > suggestion as to how I might go about pursuing a more broadly accepted
> > peer-reviewed published proof building on this basic result.
> >
> >
> > Martin Musatov
> > m[dot]mm[at]vzw[dot]blackberry[dot]net.
>
> The mathematics formulas in that PDF are unintelligible. Was that done
Cern. --Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 19:50, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Also here are some additional related results: 1) Access to
> > Photograph:http://documents.cern.ch/cgi-bin/setlink?base=PHO&categ=photo-tsic&id...
> > 2)Conversions Information: Portable Document Format:http://
> > documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/hep-lat/9612/9612008.pdf
>
> Wgat have these to do with your drivel?
>I made these results. They are part of my proof P=NP.
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 9 May, 17:10, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ****Denis: I understand the effort required to keep a nice garden, so
> > I apologize if I trampled your shrubs. Re:http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ecrit-charter.html,
> > though I hope you're right re: neat results, Millenium Prize money,
>
> Millennium.
>
> > and the ladies! (though my heart is really with only one)
> > ****victor_meldrew_...@yahoo.co.uk: I like a fool misspelled
> > "orthodox". While you share the same first name with my father I can
> > only pray the reason the "666" is there because 2/3 didn't fit.
> > Re: "Does that mean it's bogus?" ***You tell me:
>
> What it is is an unintelligible mish-mash that no self-respecting
> crank would have released to the world. Did you even bother
> to look at your own pdf?
>
> > NOTE: The Google Docs parsing began generating content vertically as
> > it ran the equations I had prepared in a Microsoft Word file,
>
> Real Mathematicians do not use Macroshit Turd.
>
> > So indeed my proof
>
> What fucking proof?
>
> <Unintelligible drivel snipped save for a brief extract>
>
> > Expansion of a sum (Taylor Series) [4];.
> > 1+.. ..=1+
> > ....
> > 1!
> > +
> > .. ..-1 ..22!
> > +.
> > Followed by the Fourier Series [5]:.
> > .. .. =..0+ ....cos
> > ......
> > ..
> > +....sin
> > ......
> > ..
> > 8
> > ..=1
>
> And you want us to bow down to your genius becuase you write
> crap like this?
Until you address refrained from cussing and provide a mathematical
counterclaim, I am the on with a proof published at the top world
physics lab and you are the one with the drivel. That is the way it
is. Get it, Junior?__Martin Musatov
Martin Musatov
> On 9 May, 20:07, Martin Musatov <marty.musa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have apparently been reviewed again as he page parsed at CERN and
> > gave a new URL:
> > Here it is:http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-19396...
>
> New URL, same old shit.
Say "Jesus is Lord!"
Martin Musatov
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk
> I am the on with a proof published at the top world
> physics lab
Fuck physics, this is mathematics.
victor_me...@yahoo.co.uk
> Say "Jesus is Lord!"
"Musatov is Shit!"