A Proof for P vs. NP Problem

http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.3010

``This paper proposes a theoretic proof for P vs. NP problem. The central idea of this proof is a recursive definition for Turing machine (shortly TM). By the definition, an infinite sequence of TM is constructed and it is proved that the sequence includes all TM. Based on these TM, the class D that includes all decidable languages is defined. By proving P=D, the result P=NP is proved.''

>>24
No, that's what I meant all along. The worst-case scenario of the proof is not efficient in any meaningful sense, and it's just plain wrong to exclude it--which you just tried to do. I'm surprised you didn't catch on right away since this objection is common in any treatment of the issue. Oh right, you're 14, illiterate, and talking out of your ass. Never mind then.