You should expect to find c-relevant values in gaps between element values, since (e, 1) isn’t tailored directly to c, but is a cell representing the whole column.
If you’re wondering what could be useful at a pair of elements where x adds up to a specific thing, maybe it would help you to consider it a pair of x and n. Either would be valid. The grid’s all about squares and the patterns have squares in their squares.
And gaps do connect to every other hint. In that way they aren’t just another concept/tool.
Would you like me to put the tree back into the grid? I think they’re more beautiful back in where they started.
Kinda some a what a related
sqrt(e) -i[t] -> (i[t], e)
You are on the right track. There are shadow values!
At the point where two x values from the opposite columns add up, the difference in f will be that sum + 2.
Example: for aforementioned elements, x+x = 25, f - f = 27
So you do have an idea of what the solution looks like. Can I tell you that it isn’t complicated and can be rewritten into different ways? A solution might look like that long tree, but remember, it was also said that there were grid shortcuts. Don’t forget, the grid still confuses even the person who brought it to us.
The amplitudes of qubits can contain values that you can’t put on a number line.
The same is true for elements.
How would you use those? )(It’s not a coincedence q gets the same variable name as Quantum, so what’s special about that process?)
-t changes which factors appear with which
The cell’s d all around may get too large, but you can still go to the same x of D and D2