Hmmm, I see I wrote it backwards. Yes, I meant it's unlikely that P equals NP.
So you're simply talking about NP-P?

Exactly what does it mean for a problem to be "intermediate between P and NP"?

AFAIK P is a subset of NP. It may, although unlikely, be a proper subset.

Actually, a lot of the really talented people go to finance.
Whether they help humanity on the whole is debatable.

Twin primes are primes that differ by exactly 2, e.g. 11 and 13.
The twin prime conjecture is the conjecture that there are an infinite number of such pairs.

It's impossible for every teacher to always have better computer skills than their students..
None of my teachers ever came close.

I've personally encountered a lot of bigotry in the south. Am I not allowed to say so, or to notice?

When I meet an individual from the south, I don't assume they are racist or bigoted.

Being prejudiced would be assuming they are. Noting that there is a lot of racism in the south is not. Indeed, he also noted a lot of Christianity in the south - I supposed that's prejudiced too?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_notation

How can you have motion without time?
Time was so important to Newton he invented a short notation for the derivative with respect to time: an over dot.

From that excerpt from Wikipedia it's clear that atheism doesn't fit that definition of relgion.

And I have googled atheism. I haven't seen a "plethora of similar dogma". I have seen discussions of other religion's dogma. I asked you for some "atheist dogma" and the response was hardly a plethora. Again, what dogma?

Lots of things probably don't exist, but that doesn't make such conjecture dogma.

Exactly how was I preaching? I merely gave my view.

So you're suggesting that atheists get together in groups, keep discussing dogma, whch consists of repeating the phrase "god doesn't exist.", and on the basis of these activities and the existence of said dogma we have ourselves a religion.

You have truly opened my eyes.

Personally, having read much real dogma, I've found all of it absurd, preposterous, illogical, unfounded, self contradictory, immoral and backward. I think such magical thinking does a significant disservice to humanity.
Having seen no evidence or reasonable argument for the existence of any god I assume there isn't one. Hence I call myself an atheist.
On the other hand, I can't rule it out. I suppose some might call me an agnostic, but that misses the point. I find the existence of god to be highly unlikely - such a being should leave plenty of evidence and I've seen no credible evidence at all.
If I were to be given some credible evidence I'd change my mind to align with the available facts. I don't think that's true of religious people.
As for whether I have religion, I think if someone were to ask me if I were religious and I answered "yes" I'd be rather significantly misleading them.

Of course people care when others label them.
What utter nonsense.
And atheists don't gather in groups and share atheist dogma.
Give us some examples of atheist dogma that get preached.

That's not logic at all. It merely comes down to the definition of religion.
Your saying that if I answer "no" to the question "do you believe in god?" then I'm religious.
If that's true then answering "no" to the following questions must also make you religious:
Do you believe in Thor?
Do you believe in invisible pink unicorns?
Do you believe a 3 tonne fruit cake will, at some point in the future, appear above your head, fall from the sky and crush you to death?
Do you believe the Higg's boson exists?
Do you believe in Santa Claus?

Deciding that something is pretty unlikely due to lack of evidence doesn't make you religious, but is does, if that something is god, make you an atheist.

I know what you wrote: it's right in fron of me. But you missed my point. Perhaps this clarifies:
Atheism is a lack of belief.
If I you ask whether God or FSM actually exists for certain, an honest person must answer "I don't know", because it's impossible to know. This is really agnostic, so it's truly a pointless word.
If you ask "do you believe in a supreme being who created everyone anf everything, and answers people's prayers?" Saying no doesn't make you religious.
Just as saying no to the question "do you believe the FSM created everything?" doesn't make you religious.

Lack of belief is not a religion, no matter how much you want it to be.

Everyone lacks belief in some religions, even most. You wouldn't claim that they were religious in their lack of belief in Thor or Quetzacoatl, would you?

Perhaps you would.

Do you have a deep religion in your lack of belief in the invisible pink unicorn?