Rejection letters, correspondence, and miscellanea from the otherwise empty annals of the Journal of Universal Rejection.

Search This Blog

Tuesday, March 8, 2011


Dear Guillaume,

Thank you for submitting your proof that P ≠ NP to the Journal of Universal Rejection.  Although it must have taken you nondeterministic polynomial time to write it, it has taken me polynomial time to reject it. That is simply because we believe your proof is flawed.  If you are quite convinced of its veracity, then JofUR may be willing to accept it on the condition of making this editor a co-winner--I mean co-author.  Of course accepting your paper for publication would completely violate our founding principles, but for $500000 that may be worth it.

As to what type of paper we mostly receive, I'd say blank documents top the list, then random bits of poetry, then philosophy, theology, CS, and on down the list of different disciplines at that point.  You European folks seem to like submitting a lot (of real papers) too--definitely more than proportional to the number of page-views from Europe.

Caleb Emmons, PhD
Journal of Universal Rejection


  1. Shouldn't it be that it took "constant" time to reject instead of polynomial? Unless of course you went at least once through the pages.. ;)

  2. Good point. Maybe we should request a paper proving NP ≠ C (for the set of constant time algorithms). That would be an easier paper to write, and pretty easy to reject too.

  3. Both are correct. A constant time algorithm is polynomial time. Constant polynomial, to be precise.

  4. R., True, but then you must admit proving NP ≠ C is easier than proving NP ≠ P.