Check my P=NP proof for errors (based on incompleteness of ZFC)

[porton]

TL;DR Summary

Check my P=NP proof for errors.

Please check for errors my proof of P=NP:
PDF file
It is based on set theory and logic (incompleteness of ZFC). It uses also inversions of bijections, algorithms as arguments of other algorithms, reduction of SAT to another NP problem.

[Moderator's note: link removed.]

 

[fresh_42]

TL;DR Summary: Check my P=NP proof for errors.

Please check for errors my proof of P=NP:
PDF file
It is based on set theory and logic (incompleteness of ZFC). It uses also inversions of bijections, algorithms as arguments of other algorithms, reduction of SAT to another NP problem.

Sorry, I'm afraid we do not debunk or proofread unpublished work here. A discussion requires publication in a serious science journal.

However, this problem is so old that it is extremely unlikely that you have achieved where hundreds of scientists have failed.

This thread is closed. For interested readers about the problem, see
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/p-vs-np-conjecture-calculations-and-meaning/

 

[fresh_42]

A bit of advice for the lucky one who actually will solve this problem. If it would be $P=NP$ which I seriously doubt, then do not publish it! Deduce a polynomial traveling salesman algorithm instead, secure your copyright, and sell it to the thousands of traffic companies in the world that run trucks, container ships, or airplanes.