>>1733

Teach! Nice to see you!

>>1736

Nice to see you too, Anon!

>>1735

Well, if we’re able to solve for the small square using the t equations in row one that’s great! How do we tie that together with the column 0 knowledge? Or is it needed? If we know c, d and the small square, are we back to solving for n with the quadratic we derived? Column 0 still needs to get tied in? Thoughts, Anons?

>>1733

Ah, nice Teach! There’s that clear relationship between n and x we’ve been looking for. Nice rewrite on the formula! We’ve been banging our heads on that for a while, I think you just made it crystal clear.