Peter Sholze

I am not a mathematician like you,
Peter, but am very curious.
I spend time on the rudimentaries of rudimentaries
And study things in my purview.
I have not made a contribution--
I have pontificated on some things---
But I'd say Abel has already made my discovery.
P Versus NP cannot be,
Because it would generalize a formula for all shapes.
Some P cannot equal NP.
Why? The same reason πr^2 cannot equal l*w.
On a square, it works... if you do the radius times half the parameter
But not on a rectangle. Which is also why ellipses need Calculus
Which I spent about 2 hours figuring out one day.
As we don't know the parameter of an ellipse, therefore
Cannot generalize a simple formula for the shape;
And even then it wouldn't work on a rectangle, so you go nowhere.
We know the curve of a circle is pi, we do not know the curve of an ellipse
And that is why we need Calculus.
And then, I have one more inane idea---
That the Twin Primes can be used to solve Reimann's Hypothesis.
As we can find some way to establish a pattern through them
And the Zeta Function, that may get us to a concrete shape.
Those are my only theories, though...
Just a Philosopher.
Not as brilliant as you.