Sigact ews Complexity Theory Column 2 Lane A . Hemaspaandr a Department of Computer Science, University of Rocheste r Rochester, NY 14620, Pane@cs . rochester .ed u Introduction to Complexity Theory Column 2 Every time I see my wife after a while apart--and as until recently we lived on differen t continents, this was not that rare an event I ' m startled anew by many wonderful facets t o which familiarity will blind me soon thereafter . P and NP are like this too . The friendliness of P and NP became particularly clear to me after I spent some time looking at the (so called "weak") exponential hierarchy, which is a quite different animal than the polynomial hierarchy. After a while, I realized that the exponential hierarchy ' s behavior (e .g ., though P=NP is known to collapse the polynomial hierarchy, E=NE is not known to collapse the exponential hierarchy [Hartmanis, Immerman, and Sewelson, Inf .&Comp ., 1985]) was no t strange . The polynomial hierarchy is the fluke (in the example mentioned above, the flukeof-the-day is that the polynomial hierarchy is defined in terms of base and oracle machine s with the same time
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/machine-models-and-linear-time-complexity-faUi0pBu40