Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!endor!greg
From: greg@endor.harvard.edu (Greg)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: P = NP
Message-ID: <694@husc6.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 13:28:31 EST
Article-I.D.: husc6.694
Posted: Mon Nov 24 13:28:31 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 23:28:18 EST
References: <1953@emory.UUCP> <269@mipos3.UUCP> <403@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> <863@ur-valhalla.UUCP>
Sender: news@husc6.UUCP
Reply-To: greg@endor.UUCP (Greg)
Organization: Harvard
Lines: 16

In article <863@ur-valhalla.UUCP> badri@ur-valhalla.UUCP (Badri Lokanathan) writes:
>In article <403@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> lieman@brahms (Dan Lieman) writes:
>>Sounds to me like you heard about Manuel Blum's recent results in the
>>area of zero information proofs.  For example, he examines the question
>>of whether I can convince you that I have proved a certain result, without
>>telling you anything about the result.  He claims that this is possible.
>What exactly is meant by "without telling you anything about the
>result"? The moment you say that you have proved a certain result,
>you have disclosed the result.

What Blum means is that he can convince you that he has proved a given theorem
without telling you the proof of the theorem.  Of course both of you know the
statement of the theorem.  Admittedly Blum's results are surprising, but they
are not nonsensical.
----
Greg