A note on an alleged proof of the relative consistency of P=NP with PA
| dc.creator | Schindler, Ralf | |
| dc.date | 2000-07-05 | |
| dc.date | 2000-07-11 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-07-07T04:36:14Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-07-07T04:36:14Z | |
| dc.description | We indicate that an argument of da Costa and Doria in fact proves P=NP. This observation makes their argument appear dubious. We isolate a weak version of one of their lemmas which would already prove P=NP. We point out that even this weak version is probably false. In fact, a generalized form of this weak version is provably false. | |
| dc.description | 4 pages | |
| dc.identifier | https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0007025 | |
| dc.identifier | http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0007025 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/59527 | |
| dc.subject | Logic | |
| dc.title | A note on an alleged proof of the relative consistency of P=NP with PA | |
| dc.type | text |