Delete comment from: Computational Complexity
"A Syntactico-Semantical Bi-Polar Disorder FLP Paradox Implies SAT is NOT NP-complete, P vs. NP does not exist, and ZFC is Inconsistent!
Authors: Rafee Ebrahim Kamouna"
This is title of your archive paper.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.2947v1
Now, it does say ZFC is inconsistent.
It seems that you are confusing lot of things. Just like VD, but in a more explicit way, so it is appropriate to discuss it here, since VD and RK are in the same class, only RK is a more honest one.
The reason why they ignore RK and did not ignore VD (though they will now, they will), is that RK claims do not even look plausible on the first glance. His prose is confusing (but so was VD's), perhaps not deliberately so.
RK: try to explain your "proof" in a straightforward way, not recalling results that perhaps do not mean what you think. State your construction explicitly. If you say "encoding" explain precisely what it means. Otherwise, your "proof" is imprecise and you look like VD, which is to say, vary vague and very bad.
Sep 3, 2010, 3:47:15 AM
Posted to Intelligent questions about the alleged P NE NP proof