home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Path: sparky!uunet!walter!homebrew!jgn
- From: jgn@homebrew.bellcore.com (Joseph G. Niederberger)
- Subject: Re: Cryptography and P=NP
- Message-ID: <1992Nov23.211311.2817@walter.bellcore.com>
- Sender: news@walter.bellcore.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: homebrew.bellcore.com
- Reply-To: jgn@homebrew.UUCP (Joseph G. Niederberger)
- Organization: Bellcore, Morristown, NJ
- References: <1992Nov16.084503.10141@vax.oxford.ac.uk> <BxvEF3.Kqw.2@cs.cmu.edu> <1992Nov18.193900.20199@rchland.ibm.com> <1992Nov19.172719.1540@fid.morgan.com> <1992Nov19.193036.26711@rchland.ibm.com> <1992Nov20.090548.5840@cs.ruu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 21:13:11 GMT
- Lines: 13
-
- In article <1992Nov20.090548.5840@cs.ruu.nl> piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes:
- >>>>>> lwloen@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Larry Loen) (LL) writes:
- >
- >LL> Why doesn't Cantor's diagonal
- >LL> argument crop up somewhere and spoil everything? (I don't necessarily mean
- >LL> the original, but an appropriate analog of it).
- >
- >Why should it?
-
- Real answer is because algorithms are (by definition) not allowed to be
- infinitely long. Cantor's diagnolization works because decimal expansions
- of real numbers are (countable)-infinitely long.
-
-