tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post112543138513963348..comments2024-03-18T23:13:09.570-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: Back From VacationLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-1127182983620345902005-09-19T21:23:00.000-05:002005-09-19T21:23:00.000-05:00Is it true that solving Sudoku is NP-complete?Is it true that solving Sudoku is NP-complete?Macneil Shonlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16382866616548432101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-1125453729599808702005-08-30T21:02:00.000-05:002005-08-30T21:02:00.000-05:00Isn't that the smartest way to make sudoku popular...Isn't that the smartest way to make sudoku popular?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-1125452998800754372005-08-30T20:49:00.000-05:002005-08-30T20:49:00.000-05:00> But can you really be logical without being math...> But can you really be logical without being mathematical?<BR/><BR/>Yes, if you consider philosophers to be logical.Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281967177874276204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-1125432704675001392005-08-30T15:11:00.000-05:002005-08-30T15:11:00.000-05:00There is of course plenty of interesting math in S...There is of course <A HREF="http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DS/0507053" REL="nofollow">plenty of interesting math in Sudoku</A>. But I suspect they mean that one can solve typical published Sudoku puzzles merely by following a few simple pattern-matching rules, without a lot of calculation or deduction.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com