>>5342878
>Understanding closure under multiplication of the sum of two squares.
Closure=No Gaps? Compactification?
>This means that multiplying the sum of two squares by the sum of two squares will always give the sum of two squares.
Well that's interdasting…
>This explains the numbers that are in the columns with a square remainder.
Neat! THE REMAINDER RETURNS!
But what do we do with it?
>This is not the only pattern.
>These patterns determines what values of n are NOT in a column.
So it IS about "what's missing"!
Is THAT the gap we're looking for?
>Sometimes P=NP is about finding out what you don't know you don't know, which is hard because you don't know what to look for.
Well, it's me. I started at the end and I'm just needing the Nerds to meet me somewhere.
>If you start with the ASSUMPTION OF A SOLUTION, there must be something that is missing.
Proof? Putting it together?
Oooooor… what would be missing… hmmm…
Perspective?
>That can be a short-cut to finding it.
Turning it the right way? 'bout 90º?