[HN Gopher] Who first thought of the notion of Polynomial Time?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Who first thought of the notion of Polynomial Time?
        
       Author : furcyd
       Score  : 74 points
       Date   : 2022-11-15 11:45 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.computationalcomplexity.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.computationalcomplexity.org)
        
       | icapybara wrote:
       | Physicists and engineers think about things like that all the
       | time (e.g. "gravity dies off like 1/r^2"), so I'd guess it was
       | just a physics idea that got applied to algorithms. Probably not
       | an "aha!" moment.
        
         | schoen wrote:
         | A somewhat surprisingly modern thing about Pocklington's
         | observation is that he treats all polynomials as equivalent for
         | his purposes:
         | 
         | > the labour required here is proportional to a power of the
         | logarithm of the modulus, not to the modulus itself or its
         | square root as in the indirect processes, and hence see that in
         | the case of a large modulus the direct process will be much
         | quicker than the indirect
         | 
         | Specifically, he's pointing out that asymptotically _any_ power
         | of the logarithm of n will be smaller than a constant times n.
         | 
         | Physicists also naturally know about asymptotic comparisons,
         | but the "this algorithm asymptotically beats that algorithm
         | because it's (log n)^k1 vs. k2*n" is pretty darn similar to the
         | way we think about this today!
        
       | steppi wrote:
       | Very interesting. I wasn't aware of Pocklington. Some other early
       | work in addition to the correspondence between Godel and von
       | Neumann mentioned in another comment:
       | 
       | The French Mathematician Gabriel Lame noted in 1845 that the
       | Euclidean algorithm for finding the greatest common divisor of
       | two numbers is efficient because the number of steps grows
       | linearly with the number of digits in the input. [1]
       | 
       | John Forbes Nash wrote a letter to the NSA discussing
       | applications of what is now known as the P vs NP to cryptography
       | in 1955. The letter was declassified in 2012. [2]
       | 
       | [1] Lame, Gabriel. Note sur la limite du nombre des divisions
       | dans la recherche du plus grand commun diviseur entre deux
       | nombres entiers. 1844.
       | 
       | [2] https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-
       | features/decla...
        
       | stefantalpalaru wrote:
        
       | aatd86 wrote:
       | Doesn't it stem from series expansion?
        
       | taylorius wrote:
       | Seems to spring naturally from the idea of an algorithm using
       | nested loops, I've always thought.
        
       | danbruc wrote:
       | As one of the comments under the article mentions, there is some
       | discussion of what is now called P versus NP in the
       | correspondence between Godel and Von Neumann from 1956. Which is
       | earlier than Cobham but later than Pocklington and was itself
       | only discovered in the late 80s. [1][2]
       | 
       | [1] http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~odonnell/15455-s17/hartmanis-on-
       | godel...
       | 
       | [2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bulletin-of-
       | symbolic...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-11-16 23:01 UTC)