Timeline for Analogues of P vs. NP in the history of mathematics
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2014 at 18:08 | comment | added | John Sidles | Eventually the references of this answer will be extended to include literature linking the local vertex-edge satisfaction problem of Subhash Khot's Unique Games Conjecture (UGC) to the local atom-bond satisfaction problems of quasicrystal growth. In both UGC-problems and quasicrystals, imperfections necessarily occur, whose algorithmic/physical origins are incompletely understood. See (e.g.) Marjorie Senechal's Notices of the AMS article "What is a quasicrystal?" (2006) and Joshua Socolor's "Growth rules for quasicrystals" (1999). | |
| Mar 16, 2014 at 17:15 | comment | added | John Sidles | @EmilJeřábek, thank you for your comment. I have amended the answer (with a reference) to clarify that both definitions of "undecidable" apply. Further suggestions/improvements are welcome, needless to say, particularly if my understanding/expression of this point stands in need of clarification. | |
| Mar 16, 2014 at 17:11 | history | edited | John Sidles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Amendment per Emil Jeřábek's comment.
|
| Mar 16, 2014 at 16:39 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | You seem to be constantly confusing the term “undecidable” meaning not computable by an algorithm with the term “undecidable” meaning neither provable nor refutable in a particular formal system. | |
| Mar 16, 2014 at 15:46 | history | edited | John Sidles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
final tuning
|
| S Mar 16, 2014 at 15:39 | history | answered | John Sidles | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Mar 16, 2014 at 15:39 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by John Sidles |