>>55615942
The existence of "God" is also "common sense" for most people.

>>55615942
Can you prove it?

>>55616006
Sort of. Why is it so hard to fit NP into P? Because obviously they're fundamentally different.

It's not a formal proof of course, it's an appeal to intuition at best.

>>55615953
*tips trilby*

>NP = P
>(NP)/P = P/P
>N = 1

There, proved it for you.

>>55615942
P = NP

Prove me wrong

>>55616086
>look mom i posted it again

>>55616115
Well, if I give you a NP-hard problem, can you translate it to P?

>>55616086
P=0 is another solution

Leave it to /g/ to sturggle with kindergarten math

>>55616022
it's generally agreed that P is not equal to NP

deriving a formal proof is the entire point of the problem

>>55616143
fucking hell already going on meta-level questions

while your implications are right, it's impossible for me, you can't prove that p ≠ np too

>>55616184
So we both lose the debate

>>55616243
conclusion: p=np problem is unsolvable

case closed

>>55616022
>It's not a formal proof of course, it's an appeal to intuition at best

so... it's not a proof at all

>>55616143
>>55616184
>>55616243
>>55616269
Kys retards