arXiv Analytics

Sign in

arXiv:math/0007025 [math.LO]AbstractReferencesReviewsResources

A note on an alleged proof of the relative consistency of P=NP with PA

Ralf Schindler

Published 2000-07-05, updated 2000-07-11Version 4

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.

Comments: 4 pages
Categories: math.LO
Related articles: Most relevant | Search more
arXiv:math/0009077 [math.LO] (Published 2000-09-07)
The relative consistency of g<cf(Sym(omega))
arXiv:math/0404220 [math.LO] (Published 2004-04-11, updated 2017-08-07)
A comment on "p<t"
arXiv:1911.00434 [math.LO] (Published 2019-11-01)
Consistency of $\neg AC^{3}$ + $`χ(E_{G_{1}})=3$, $χ(E_{G_{2}})\geqω\impliesχ(E_{G_{1}\times G_{2}})=3$' and relative consistency via strongly compactness

Links

Toolbox