

P = NP for Non-Math Majors - audreyw
http://www.audreywatters.com/2010/08/11/p-np-for-non-math-majors/

======
RiderOfGiraffes
I'm not going to flag this, becuase it's not spam, and it is (at least semi)
relevant, but I find this really obnoxious. While appearing to be informative,
it's actually pandering to the "OMG - LOL" crowd and giving them an excuse to
say "I don't understand _ANY_ of this!"

"Math is hard" says Barbie. Well, yes, math is hard. But if you give me 5
minutes I can explain the problem for real, and its significance. I explained
it to my mother, for example, who's 80 and about as non-math as you get get,
and then a while later heard her give an accurate explanation to a friend of
hers.

Understanding the problem isn't rocket science or brain surgery or (pandering
to the Sheldons in the audience) string theory from theoretical physics.

I've changed my mind. I will flag this.

~~~
kaitnieks
It is written in a stupid way with lots of words without real content, but I
think it actually has a paragraph that explains the problem quite well to "OMG
- LOL" crowd:

P and NP are both a collection of problems whose solutions are “fast.” The
question of P versus NP revolves around whether for all problems that a
computer can quickly verify a solution (NP), if it can also quickly find a
solution (P). We know that if we have quickly found a solution that we can
quickly verify it, so P problems are a subset of NP ones. But the P versus NP
problem asks the reverse (sorta): can something be easy to verify, but hard to
solve? Are P problems always NP problems? Does P equal NP?

------
stipes
I much prefer this treatment:
[http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/stating-pnp-
without...](http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/stating-pnp-without-
turing-machines/)

However, it is more of a "p vs. np for non CS theory people".

------
jam
Let me tell you, being a math major doesn't automatically mean you get P=?NP.

