/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12050660

541KiB, 1080x749, 1573000578471.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 12:07:13 2020 No.12050660 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12050663 >>12050708 >>12050809 >>12050910 >>12050919

Can all problems which can be solved by exhaustion or brute-force also be solved by mathematical proof?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Kurt-Godel.jpg, 193KiB, 780x520

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:08:42 No.12050663 Report

Quoted By: >>12050689

>>12050660
No, see:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:16:33 No.12050689 Report

Quoted By: >>12050738

>>12050663
You either don't understand Godel's proof or you don't understand the question in op, because the two are not related.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1595287978191.jpg, 38KiB, 758x644

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:19:27 No.12050697 Report

Quoted By:

Yes which is exactly why I spend $1000 every two weeks on lottery tickets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:24:44 No.12050708 Report

Quoted By: >>12050729 >>12050734 >>12050744 >>12050818

>>12050660
Prove 1=1

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:34:24 No.12050729 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050708
$\forall A \, \forall B \, ( \forall X \, (X \in A \iff X \in B) \implies A = B)$

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:35:28 No.12050734 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050708
It proves itself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:36:41 No.12050738 Report

Quoted By: >>12050748

>>12050689
>I don't understand what an axiomatic framework is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:38:14 No.12050744 Report

Quoted By: >>12050752

>>12050708
1=1 (definition of equality)
QED

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:39:24 No.12050748 Report

Quoted By: >>12050768 >>12050784

>>12050738
Godel's theorems show that formal systems are incomplete if consistent. I am not asking if there are problems that have no proof. I am asking if problems that have been solved by exhaustion (meaning they are ALREADY SOLVED) also have an inductive or contrapositive solution.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:40:59 No.12050752 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050744
Based

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:45:30 No.12050768 Report

Quoted By: >>12050922

>>12050748
Oh, yes, I misread your OP. Apologies.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:50:23 No.12050784 Report

Quoted By: >>12050806 >>12050895

>>12050748
Problems which are solvable by brute-force are probably solvable by encoding the whole brute-force process into a proof.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:57:55 No.12050806 Report

Quoted By: >>12050895

>>12050784
Yes, at minimum we need some kind of formal definition of the difference between a brute-force demonstration and a proof. Recall the proofs of the 4-color theorem that required checking a vast multitude of cases.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 12:58:33 No.12050809 Report

Quoted By: >>12050822 >>12050899

>>12050660
Your question is basically "is P equal to NP"

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:01:09 No.12050818 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050708
It follows immediately from the reflexive property of equivalence relations (of which one is equality)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:02:53 No.12050822 Report

Quoted By: >>12050899

>>12050809
Yeah I don't see how the OP is different to the P=NP problem?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:40:04 No.12050895 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050784
>>12050806
>encoding the whole brute-force process into a proof
But this still constitutes a search. It's not an 'elegant' solution.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:42:13 No.12050899 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050809
>>12050822
It's not the same thing at all. P = NP is concerned with how long it takes to compute and verify solutions to a problem. It is about the computational complexity of algorithms.

I am asking if there are any theorems which can be

1) proved by counterexample OR by exhaustion

AND

2) NOT by a direct proof

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:42:53 No.12050904 Report

Quoted By: >>12050914

Whoops, accidentally tapped /sci/ instead of /soc/, haha.
Have sex, nerds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:45:45 No.12050910 Report

Quoted By: >>12050924

>>12050660
Brute force is mathematical proof
Someone needs to work on their abstract thinking

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:48:54 No.12050914 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050904
Thank you, I hope I do have sex, although I no longer Identify as a nerd since it is a term that midwits have realized makes them seem smarter than they are.
Learn a math, jock!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:52:38 No.12050919 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050660
you need perfect information for a full proof
so as long as non-bijective functions exist, no.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:53:33 No.12050922 Report

Quoted By: >>12050923 >>12050928

>>12050768
Retard

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO kimbo_sliced.jpg, 30KiB, 319x375

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:54:15 No.12050923 Report

Quoted By: >>12050928

>>12050922
Drop coords and I'll drop you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:54:17 No.12050924 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050910
Start reading here. Come back when you understand basic terms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_exhaustion

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Aug 2020 13:55:28 No.12050928 Report

Quoted By:

>>12050922
Why do people make posts like this?

>>12050923
Ignore him he's an idiot.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches