Abstract:This article finds the answer to the question: for any problem from which a non-deterministic algorithm can be derived which verifies whether an answer is correct or not in polynomial time (complexity class NP), is it possible to create an algorithm that finds the right answer to the problem in polynomial time (complexity class P)? For this purpose, this article shows a decision problem and analyzes it to demonstrate that this problem does not belong to the complexity class P, but it belongs to the class NP; doing so it will be proved that it exists at least one problem that belongs to class NP but not to class P, which means that this article will prove that not all NP problems are P.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper attempts to address the question "Does P equal NP?" Specifically, the paper aims to prove that there exists at least one problem that belongs to the complexity class NP but not to the complexity class P, thereby proving that P does not equal NP.
### Background
The P vs NP problem is a central question in the field of computation, proposed by Stephen Cook and Leonid Levin in 1971. The core of the problem is whether there exists a deterministic algorithm that can solve all decision problems, whose solutions can be verified in nondeterministic polynomial time (i.e., NP problems), within polynomial time. If P=NP, then all NP problems can be solved in polynomial time, which would have significant implications for fields such as cryptography.
### Main Content of the Paper
1. **Problem Definition**:
- The paper defines a game called "Debilandia," which is based on Conway's Game of Life and has Turing completeness.
- Each "Tile" in the game represents different states and rules, and through these rules, the behavior of a Turing machine can be simulated.
2. **Problem Statement**:
- Given a set A containing several positive integers, and a set B containing specific values (the union of A plus 4, 25, 43, 7, 5, 2), determine whether there exists a list L such that L is a variant of set B and satisfies the following conditions:
1. The first number in list L must be 2.
2. After 2, there must be a pair of numbers belonging to set A, followed by a 7, then a pair of numbers belonging to the intersection of sets A and B, and so on.
3. These pairs of numbers must not repeat and must cover all possible pairs.
4. After the last pair of numbers, there must be a 5.
5. Before the end of each generation of the game, a 4 must appear.
6. The initial state generation assumes each pair of numbers is a point in the game grid.
7. Finally, if the Turing machine generated by the game configuration halts, the last number in list L is 25; otherwise, it is 43.
3. **Proof Process**:
- **The Problem is not in P**:
- Since the problem can be reduced to the Turing machine halting problem, and the halting problem is undecidable, this problem is also undecidable.
- To find the correct answer, the entire game process must be traversed, meaning any algorithm must perform exponential operations, so the problem is not in P.
- **The Problem is in NP**:
- The paper designs a verification algorithm that can verify the correctness of a given answer in polynomial time.
- By analyzing the steps of the algorithm, it is proven that the time complexity of the algorithm is polynomial, thereby proving that the problem is in NP.
### Conclusion
Through the above analysis, the paper proves that there exists at least one problem that belongs to NP but not to P, thereby concluding that P does not equal NP. This result implies that for NP-complete problems (a class of problems that can be polynomially reduced to other NP problems), there does not exist a polynomial-time algorithm to solve them.