= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RichardKennaway comments on Open thread, Nov. 23 - Nov. 29, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (257)
Yes, although as far as I know things like that, and the FCT in particular, have only been proved by custom software written for the problem.
There's also a distinction between using a computer to find a proof, and using it to formalise a proof found by other means.
Indeed, the computer-generated proofs of 4CT were not only not formal proofs, they were not correct. Once a decade, someone would point out an error in the previous version and code his own. But now there is a version for an off the shelf verifier.