If Cook made the P versus NP question interesting to logicians, Karp
made the question important to everyone else.
Richard Karp, Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems,
Proceedings of a Symposium on the Complexity of Computer Computations,
1972.
All the general methods presently known for computing the chromatic
number of a graph, deciding whether a graph has a Hamiltonian circuit,
or solving a system of linear inequalities in which the variables are
constrained to be 0 or 1, require a combinatorial search for which the
worst case time requirement grows exponentially with the length of the
input. In this paper we give theorems which strongly suggest, but do
not imply, that these problems, as well as many others, will remain
intractable perpetually.
Karp's paper used Cook's
Theorem that satisfiability was NP-complete
to prove 21 other problems NP-complete, including Clique, Integer
Programming, Hamiltonian Cycle, Chromatic Number, Partition and Max
Cut. Many of these problems arise from real-world
optimization problems and Karp showed that if any of them have
efficient algorithms then they all do. Researchers would later extend
Karp's techniques to show hundreds if not thousands of natural
problems are NP-complete.
Karp's paper named the classes P and NP and defined the notion of
reduction (now often called Karp Reduction) where a language A
reduces to a language B if there is a polynomial-time function f such
that x∈A iff f(x)∈B. He defined a notion "polynomial
complete" as the set of problems A in NP that every other
NP-problem reduces to A, a notion we now call NP-complete. Karp also
makes the argument that the definitions are robust to different reasonable
encodings of the problem and different models of Turing machines.
Karp also alludes to the polynomial-time hierarchy.
If P=NP then NP is closed under complementation and polynomial-bounded
existential quantification. Hence it is also closed under
polynomial-bounded universal quantification. It follows that a
polynomial-bounded analogue of Kleene's Arithmetic Hierarchy becomes
trivial if P=NP.
Karp lists three NP problems whose classification was open at the
time.
LINEAR INEQUALITIES: Basically Linear Programming, shown to be in
P in 1979 by the recently departed Khachiyan.
NONPRIMES: Shown to be in P in 2002 by Agrawal, Kayal and Saxena.
GRAPH ISOMORPHISM: Not known to be in P but if GI is NP-complete then
the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses which was shown in 1987
by combining results of Goldreich-Micali-Wigderson, Goldwasser-Sipser
and Boppana-Håstad-Zachos.
Karp's paper is justly celebrated but in your one line preface you missed that Cook's paper already had begun showing hardness of combinatorial problems, and not just logical ones. As you mentioned in your earlier post, Cook's paper already showed that a natural combinatorial problem, Subgraph Homomorphism, is NP-hard.