|
Engineering and science diverge in regards of
principle of openness and the big numbers
For science the infinite ("open") set of natural
numbers (1,2,3... so on) is the basis of everything what can be said and shared,
and the finite set of billions of billions elements with billons of billions
properties and billons of billions relationships just is a "simple"
subset
For engineering it's vise versa: 1,2,3 and so on is
simple, the 15-puzzle is "simplier" than the
Rubik's Cube, and all other problems look like the puzzles
(complexity is time to solve)
Scientific scope: "For the n-puzzle, a generalized
15-puzzle, the problem of finding an optimal solution is known to be NP-hard.
Therefore, whether a practical God's algorithm for this problem exists remains
unknown but appears unlikely." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God's_algorithm
The "simple" questions devide science and
engineering:
Can the infinite and open world be
succesfully "represented" by finit number of things (even a "very-very big"
number)?
What is more important - to resolve a puzzle, or to
prove that the puzzle is NP-hard?
Have fun
Yuri
|