Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!nsc!andrew
From: andrew@nsc.nsc.com (andrew)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets
Subject: Re: Prove non-existence with neural net?
Summary: non-existence of course impossible
Keywords: Cray, finite projective plane, confusion
Message-ID: <9905@nsc.nsc.com>
Date: 18 Feb 89 04:52:03 GMT
References: <1637@cps3xx.UUCP> <1233@usfvax2.EDU> <476@madnix.UUCP> <44911@linus.UUCP>
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
Lines: 22

Hmmmm. Re-phrase your title: "prove non-existence with neural net?" to
"prove existence after termination with neural net" and all becomes clear.

Perhaps Sean is being unduly pessimistic. Perhaps Sean realises that if
an FPP can be found - e.g. by a neural net - that is of an order
formally excluded by conjecture - then that conjecture is disproved.
The nice thing thing about the net idea is how it scales with order.
Order **6 is much nicer than (NcK)**N, but of course this is, as he
point out, apples with non-exhaustive pears. "Exactly" is quite easy -
just look at the NN settled state, and count 1's for a few seconds.
This is eyeball and brain territory, and no big deal. For lack of
decent simulation x-ware, I'm unable to say what happens with order 6.  

	Andrew Palfreyman, MS D3969		PHONE:  408-721-4788 work
	National Semiconductor				408-247-0145 home
	2900 Semiconductor Dr.			there's many a slip
	P.O. Box 58090				'twixt cup and lip
	Santa Clara, CA  95052-8090

	DOMAIN: andrew@logic.sc.nsc.com  
	ARPA:   nsc!logic!andrew@sun.com
	USENET: ...{amdahl,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,sun}!nsc!logic!andrew