Wednesday, August 11, 2010
There you have it. P!=NP.
In cryptology class, one of the first problems discussed is, is P=NP (or P!=NP).
What it means in English is, can a difficult equation that can be verified by a computer in short period of time, also be solved by a computer in a short period of time.
In real world terms for example, one question this problem is asking is, can an encrypted message that can be verified as accurate, also be cracked in a short time.
The answer to this is important. If P=NP then eventually we will be able to find quick solutions to any encrypted message - and many of our current encryption methods would need to be replaced.
If the answer is no, then it is possible to create ciphers, such that deciphering them is guaranteed to take a very, very long time.
Consider a jigsaw puzzle. You can look at it and quickly see that it is solved. But it takes time to actually solve it. But need that be so (metaphorically speaking)?
There are of course other applications to this problem.
The P vs NP problem is considered so difficult that it is one of seven problems that the Clay Mathematics Institute is giving away $1,000,000 to solve.
Hewlett-Packard Research Laboratory researcher Vinay Deolalikar in India (hence the Taj Mahal above) is claiming to have solved the P=NP problem in a 100 page document.
He says P!=NP.
The document is currently undergoing peer review.
You can download it here (PDF) and look for mistakes.
In cryptology class, one of the first problems discussed is, is P=NP (or P!=NP).
What it means in English is, can a difficult equation that can be verified by a computer in short period of time, also be solved by a computer in a short period of time.
In real world terms for example, one question this problem is asking is, can an encrypted message that can be verified as accurate, also be cracked in a short time.
The answer to this is important. If P=NP then eventually we will be able to find quick solutions to any encrypted message - and many of our current encryption methods would need to be replaced.
If the answer is no, then it is possible to create ciphers, such that deciphering them is guaranteed to take a very, very long time.
Consider a jigsaw puzzle. You can look at it and quickly see that it is solved. But it takes time to actually solve it. But need that be so (metaphorically speaking)?
There are of course other applications to this problem.
The P vs NP problem is considered so difficult that it is one of seven problems that the Clay Mathematics Institute is giving away $1,000,000 to solve.
Hewlett-Packard Research Laboratory researcher Vinay Deolalikar in India (hence the Taj Mahal above) is claiming to have solved the P=NP problem in a 100 page document.
He says P!=NP.
The document is currently undergoing peer review.
You can download it here (PDF) and look for mistakes.
Labels:
P vs NP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2012
(1)
- ► December 2012 (1)
-
►
2011
(44)
- ► October 2011 (1)
- ► September 2011 (3)
- ► August 2011 (5)
- ► April 2011 (5)
- ► March 2011 (7)
- ► February 2011 (6)
- ► January 2011 (6)
-
▼
2010
(109)
- ► December 2010 (4)
- ► November 2010 (7)
- ► October 2010 (10)
- ► September 2010 (8)
- ▼ August 2010 (9)
- ► April 2010 (11)
- ► March 2010 (9)
- ► February 2010 (12)
- ► January 2010 (12)
-
►
2009
(277)
- ► December 2009 (14)
- ► November 2009 (14)
- ► October 2009 (17)
- ► September 2009 (19)
- ► August 2009 (17)
- ► April 2009 (18)
- ► March 2009 (34)
- ► February 2009 (32)
- ► January 2009 (29)
-
►
2008
(390)
- ► December 2008 (47)
- ► November 2008 (24)
- ► October 2008 (33)
- ► September 2008 (41)
- ► August 2008 (20)
- ► April 2008 (27)
- ► March 2008 (40)
- ► February 2008 (29)
- ► January 2008 (28)
-
►
2007
(318)
- ► December 2007 (14)
- ► November 2007 (26)
- ► October 2007 (25)
- ► September 2007 (20)
- ► August 2007 (32)
- ► April 2007 (31)
- ► March 2007 (34)
- ► February 2007 (28)
- ► January 2007 (18)
-
►
2006
(333)
- ► December 2006 (16)
- ► November 2006 (19)
- ► October 2006 (12)
- ► September 2006 (21)
- ► August 2006 (54)
- ► April 2006 (11)
- ► March 2006 (25)
- ► February 2006 (22)
- ► January 2006 (52)
-
►
2005
(88)
- ► December 2005 (32)
- ► November 2005 (18)
- ► October 2005 (5)
- ► September 2005 (12)
- ► August 2005 (21)
0 comments:
Post a Comment