Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsri.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!vassos
From: vassos@utcsri.UUCP (Vassos Hadzilacos)
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: P = NP
Message-ID: <3684@utcsri.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 19:13:34 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsri.3684
Posted: Mon Nov 24 19:13:34 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 23:46:57 EST
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 22

>>[...] 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.

> Is this statement supposed to be a joke or something? I cannot make
> any sense out of it.
> 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. This would automatically contradict the 
> second part of the statement. I would indeed like to hear more about
> this in sci.math.
> 
> Badri Lokanathan

Example: Being able to convince you that a number is composite without
telling you any of its prime factors would be a "0-information `proof'" that
the number is non-prime. "Convincing you" basically amounts to you asking
me questions that I must answer and which you've chosen so that if I answer
by guessing (i.e. without really knowing what I am talking about) then
with very high likelihood you'll figure out I am a fraud.

Vassos Hadzilacos.