fiveworlds Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 For P = NP I must prove that a Non-Deterministic algorithm can be the same asa deterministic algorithm. A Non-Deterministic algorithm may use random variables to change the algorithm based on different inputs. For this I am using the current time which is justa counter to generate a random variable in a deterministic manner. We will assume thatthe non_deterministic is truly random yet the deterministic algorithm is pseudorandom. It equals the exact same thing though.<script> function deterministic(input){ var d = new Date(); var n = d.getTime(); var n =""+n+""; var rand = n.slice(n.length-1,n.length); document.write(input*rand); } function non_deterministic(input){ rand = Math.floor((Math.random() * 10) + 1); document.write(input*rand); } deterministic(10); non_deterministic(10);</script>
fiveworlds Posted July 24, 2016 Author Posted July 24, 2016 How do you propose getting truly random variables? Exactly you can't really. That's why there really are no non_deterministic algorithms. You could also say that every Non_Deterministic algorithm is actually just a Deterministic algorithm mislabeled because the randomness could be considered as an additional input.
ydoaPs Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 Exactly you can't really. That's why there really are no non_deterministic algorithms. You could also say that every Non_Deterministic algorithm is actually just a Deterministic algorithm mislabeled because the randomness could be considered as an additional input. It's not as though it's impossible. You'd just need an extra bit of hardware. Use as your seed variable(s) the timestamp of a decay of an atom of a radioactive source. A detector picks up the decay, logs the time, sends it to the number generator. Boom, an encrypted truly random number generator. 1
Strange Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 It's not as though it's impossible. You'd just need an extra bit of hardware. Use as your seed variable(s) the timestamp of a decay of an atom of a radioactive source. A detector picks up the decay, logs the time, sends it to the number generator. Boom, an encrypted truly random number generator. Available here: https://www.random.org I'm not sure I see the relevance to P vs NP, though ...
fiveworlds Posted July 24, 2016 Author Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) I'm not sure I see the relevance to P vs NP NP is an extension of P which incorporates the use of true random numbers. So the question asks can I generate truly random numbers? Von Neumann suggested that it was impossible to generate true random https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann Edited July 24, 2016 by fiveworlds
Strange Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 NP is an extension of P which incorporates the use of true random numbers. That sounds more like P = BPP http://www.claymath.org/sites/default/files/pvsnp.pdf
fiveworlds Posted July 24, 2016 Author Posted July 24, 2016 That sounds more like P = BPP BPP is the set of all algorithms that can be recognized by a truly random polynomial time algorithm. For BPP to exist you must prove that true random is real.
Strange Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 BPP is the set of all algorithms that can be recognized by a truly random polynomial time algorithm. For BPP to exist you must prove that true random is real. Which seemed to be your original point.
fiveworlds Posted July 24, 2016 Author Posted July 24, 2016 Which seemed to be your original point. Yeah. BPP is really a set of tests for your truly random number generator which it must be able to satisfy in order to be classed as truly random.
Strange Posted July 24, 2016 Posted July 24, 2016 Yeah. BPP is really a set of tests for your truly random number generator which it must be able to satisfy in order to be classed as truly random. Huh? Anyway, as far as I am aware random numbers have nothing much to do with P vs NP.
fiveworlds Posted July 25, 2016 Author Posted July 25, 2016 Anyway, as far as I am aware random numbers have nothing much to do with P vs NP. Basically what I am saying is that I don't believe there are any non-deterministic algorithms. So since NP = non-deterministic algorithms + deterministic algorithms(P) AND non-deterministic algorithms = 0. Then NP = 0 + P = P
Strange Posted July 25, 2016 Posted July 25, 2016 Basically what I am saying is that I don't believe there are any non-deterministic algorithms. So since NP = non-deterministic algorithms + deterministic algorithms(P) AND non-deterministic algorithms = 0. Then NP = 0 + P = P I'm sure the cheque for 1 million dollars is on the way.
fiveworlds Posted July 25, 2016 Author Posted July 25, 2016 I'm sure the cheque for 1 million dollars is on the way. I wouldn't want it. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms178091.aspx states what non-deterministic algorithms are and gives a few examples one of these is the GetTime function. They state this is non-deterministic because with the same input it gives a different output but this isn't true at all because the string it reads from memory is in itself an input to the function and therefore the function is deterministic.
Strange Posted July 25, 2016 Posted July 25, 2016 I wouldn't want it. Good. You won't be disappointed then. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now