P neq NP Proof

Odds are good that the paper that actually proves P != P (a) will be written in TeX, (b) will not include references to introductory algorithms textbooks, Wikipedia pages, and lecture slides, (c) will not conclude by saying "There is no relevant related work on the goal to really solve the P versus NP question," (d) will not be littered with grammatical errors, and (e) will be written by an author who already has many publications on the arxiv.

Which is not to say that there's no good thought in here...

Oh, for Pete's sake, can we stop posting these already? See the first comment on this previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=347145

Also, some thoughts on a closely related topic: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1114578

Well first you have the define the constants...

P = NP iff 0 = P(N - 1) iff P = 0 OR N = 1

That wasn't so hard, was it?

More seriously, P=NP can be a bit of a mind virus. I probably don't have the training to attempt such a question but I have nonetheless spent some time idly pondering it, usually only to independently rediscover some known NP-complete problem. ("Hey look, SAT reduces to ... oh wait, that's also NP complete. Damn.")

Hmm, it appears there are quite a few proofs both ways here (this is one of them listed): http://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm