← Back to context Comment by caughtinthought 12 hours ago I'm stating the conjecture as requested 4 comments caughtinthought Reply pcstl 12 hours ago I think you misunderstood, I believe they were requesting a layperson-friendly explanation of the conjecture and not a statement of it. jibalt 9 hours ago How is "This proves that EXP != NP", which is false, a layperson-friendly explanation of the actual proof that 3SAT is sub-exponential?Note https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50253213 moishe_syzslak 11 hours ago Whenever someone asks for an ELI5, there's always got to be somebody who further confuses the issue. caughtinthought 11 hours ago Which is a separate issue than the one you commented originally
pcstl 12 hours ago I think you misunderstood, I believe they were requesting a layperson-friendly explanation of the conjecture and not a statement of it. jibalt 9 hours ago How is "This proves that EXP != NP", which is false, a layperson-friendly explanation of the actual proof that 3SAT is sub-exponential?Note https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50253213 moishe_syzslak 11 hours ago Whenever someone asks for an ELI5, there's always got to be somebody who further confuses the issue. caughtinthought 11 hours ago Which is a separate issue than the one you commented originally
jibalt 9 hours ago How is "This proves that EXP != NP", which is false, a layperson-friendly explanation of the actual proof that 3SAT is sub-exponential?Note https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50253213
moishe_syzslak 11 hours ago Whenever someone asks for an ELI5, there's always got to be somebody who further confuses the issue.
I think you misunderstood, I believe they were requesting a layperson-friendly explanation of the conjecture and not a statement of it.
How is "This proves that EXP != NP", which is false, a layperson-friendly explanation of the actual proof that 3SAT is sub-exponential?
Note https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50253213
Whenever someone asks for an ELI5, there's always got to be somebody who further confuses the issue.
Which is a separate issue than the one you commented originally