You essentially would be looking for a magic solution to everything. Just based on geometry, you can't solve P = NP. It's taking a Nondeterministic Polynomial and making it into a Polynomial. That's what it's saying. You'd need to break geometry to do it. Even getting to finite solutions on your prime factoring, and always checking them, requires an entirely different species of math than other things it would be used for. It is generalizing a formula for all forms of geometry. That simply can't happen. It's why a Circle is different than a Square and a Square is different than a Rectangle. It's just based on different observations of shapes, which finding a way to see if a thing is solved in all cases cannot be generalized, because every formula is a different shape, essentially, rooted in that specific problem.

18 is actually a good age, because your brain becomes more cognizant and aware of itself. It’s a good age to grow up, there’s biology involved with that, too. You’ve heard of the “Freshman 15” right? That’s part of it. The body reaches peak sexual maturity at that age, and also the brain begins to gather a sense of other. Any later, you could stunt people, any earlier you could make them grow up too fast. Just like shortly after turning 30 you reach the peak of your maturity, and can correctly guide other people. It’s just a mental maturity, it happens really fast, over the course of a few weeks. Like my squash growing out on my deck, it took one day for little nubs to turn into a full grown flower. In about two or three days they’ll turn into squash. Things happen very quickly, and not doing the right kind of pruning or preparation at the right time can kill the plant. It’s very precise. It’s the same with people, our stages of development are kind of understood historically. In most cultures 18 is the age people came out into society, and were presented as fully formed members. Just like a child can grow a foot and a half in a couple of months.

1989 - 1995 I love the Johnny Appleseed, George Washington Cut Down a Cherry Tree, John Henry, Honest Abe, Little House on the Prairie, Mother Goose Nursery Rhymes, Elvis and Beatles America. 

1996 - 2007 I half liked the George Bush is dumb, Bill Clinton, Oprah Winfrey is such a good person, Bill Gates, Sopranos, Harry Potter, Eminem, Beyonce America.

2008 - 2014 I didn't even like the Obama first black president, Ted Cruz, Steve Jobs, Famous for being famous Kim Kardashian, Game of Thrones, Fifty Shades of Grey, Kanye West America. 

2015 - 2025 And never the Donald Trump will build a wall, AOC, Genius Maybe Elon Musk, Gavin Newsome, Georgia and Ginny, Crossfire, Tekashi69, Drake America. 

One might rack their mind, and say, "Calculus is only an approximation." Because it seems too difficult to gather every point on a slope and curve. Yet, hear me out... It is not an approximation, because the calculus turns the curve into a line, and each addition to the formula is a newly defined part of the curve. So, the infinite sum works over the curve and turns what is curved into a singular line, making what is a curve into a straight line.

Errata - Also, Calculus works from formulas, that make repeated patterns, by plotting points and then forming a curve through it. So, the exact math comes from the formula, and forging it through plot points.

Errata Secundo - One could, also, compound formulas, and build them on top of each other, for specific parts of a curve, integrating new segments to it, to get an exact curve, taking each segment piece by piece. Though difficult with hand calculations, a computer should handle it perfectly, and is indeed why we have them in the first place.

I'm a total amateur at math. I just go for the simple stuff. And try to understand that. I did find out why an ellipse needs calculus to solve. The curve isn't related to Pi. I attacked it from every angle, looking for a simpler formula. The best I had wasn't right. I like to know the theorems behind it. Like Calculus and Trigonometry. I don't do advanced stuff... although I think P Versus NP can't be solved. Some NP can't equal P. I think people, instead of looking for a shortcut, should break down the geometry of NP difficult equations, and do something like a Geometric Proof to find whatever they're looking for.

Man thinks 'cause he rules the earth, he can do with it as he please
And if things don't change soon, he will
Oh, man has invented his doom.
First step was touching the moon.

Man invented his doom, by touching the moon--we have the capabilities to destroy the earth with space weapons and nuclear war.

Now, there's a woman on my block.
She just sit there as the night grow still.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?

The woman is Wisdom---"She cries out in the street, 'turn ye here at my reproof." She wants man to have his license to kill taken away---as man has the license to fight wars indiscriminately, and make lawful war, like is happening in Israel right now and Ukraine.

Now, they take him and they teach him
And they groom him for life
And they set him on a path where he's bound to get ill
Then they bury him with stars
Sell his body like they do used cars

The schools and television groom you for life--it teaches you how to have your life, and be distracted. But, it sells you through the capitalist machine... you're a product for corporations, your body a tool to produce for the engine of commerce.

Now, there's a woman on my block
She just sit there facin' the hill
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?

Now, he's hell bent for destruction
He's afraid and confused
And his brain has been mismanaged with great skill
All he believes are his eyes
And his eyes, they just tell him lies

Man is hell bent on destruction---will destroy themselves through nuclear war. He's afraid by the news--such as the war in Vietnam---and he's mismanaged with great skill, believing his eyes, that there  seems to be peace. But, his eyes are telling him  lies... there is no peace.

But there's a woman on my block
Sitting there in a cold chill
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?

You may be noisemaker, spirit maker, heartbreaker, backbreaker;
leave no stone unturned
May be an actor in a plot, that might be all that you got
till your error you clearly learn

The plot of life, is to get rich, get all you can out of life, do the things you want to do to make life easy and enjoy your produce. You could be a very happy person, and spirited, and tough. But you're only an actor in the plot... kind of like an extra, as the world goes by, and your error you clearly learn is that you're not that important. You feel center to the stage, but you're just an extra.

Now he worships at an altar
Of a stagnant pool
And when he sees his reflection, he's fulfilled
Oh, man is opposed to fair play
He wants it all and he wants it his way

The reflection is the television,  giving us our reflection, and the News and our programs we consume, which are brainwashing us. When we see our reflection, we're fulfilled. Some have said this is like Narcissus, staring at his reflection and hearing Echo behind him; maybe Wisdom is Echo? Kind of reminds me of my story St. George and the Dragon. And instead of looking back at Wisdom, and receiving her, we're selfishly glutting ourselves on the entertainment, and our reflections, as the world moves on, and we're only a minor character in this world,  thinking we're the central point, or the fulcrum of it. We all have this egotism, trying to make our way in life, get the goal of a good life.

Now, there's a woman on my block.
She just sit there as the night grow still.
She say who gonna take away his license to kill?

Dylan, Bob. License to Kill. Bob Dylan.com. Web. https://www.bobdylan.com/songs/license-kill/ 6.15.25

1-2. The needle on a caravan refers to a caravan of camels passing through the Needle of Jerusalem.
3-4. When you make the decision to ride without a saddle, you are free... and Christ rode upon the Colt and Donkey.
5-6. The potter's tool is his treadle, the mason's grout.
7-8. He kneels to kiss God's sandals, and all the "Stones Cry out."

He was struggling with his homosexuality, his affluence and his Catholic beliefs. He made the decision to be gay, and stuck with it, but also Christian. Maybe trying to reconcile the two, that we all sin. And he's truly struggling with it. We're all affluent, so what about that?

However... affluence isn't a sin in Romans which leads to death. Or in 1 and 2 Corinthians. Homosexuality is. No man, practicing such things, can inherit eternal life. The homosexual has to repent of their homosexuality, and abstain from it, just like the adulterer or the fornicator, or the bitter man, or the slanderer or libeler or the one trying to accomplish their work of salvation themselves (Which is unrest). There can be no salvation for one who wishes to continue in their sin.

But he's struggling with that question. "If a rich man can't be saved, but is saved, why can't a sinner like me?"

I'd simply say, the righteous man wants to cease from all sin. The unregenerate does not. And God gives the power to abstain from all sin, and the willing heart, and ceases even the temptation after a while.

([4{radius a + radius b}]*π/4)=p

([2 radius a + 2 radius b]*π/4)=p

***
Prior Work to Solution

***
Section I

We all have to be wrong, before we get it right. Just today, I was working on a means of calculating an Ellipses' perimeter. You’d think, “That’s easy. Shouldn’t the hard part be the area?” No.

But, I looked at a rectangle, to see if it worked the same as a square (See Section II), and worked every possible angle—and had a specific measurement where it worked, and then a second measurement where it worked, but not a third—so I thought I had found a formula. But, I didn’t, so I rescinded it.

Now I have a second idea, but I have to look at the circle area and perimeter formula to find a relation there. I don’t know… actually. But what I’m chasing right now, Pi is the universal measurement of a curve where the curve is equal… and the area is always equal to the curve it’s just exponentiated—that’s a principle in calculus. So, if I can find a way to reverse the area down to the perimeter—which may just need calculus, so that I can’t do, and we may already be doing it—but if I can find a way to do that linearly or quadratically, I’ll have a simpler formula.

See the problem with this, actually, lies in a relation that actually the number e describes. So, it may just require calculus to solve, actually, on all fronts. Because when dealing with linear and exponential functions, there’s a point of “Equilibrium” which is what “e” is, that number, and that basically describes the point where the area and perimeter are equal. Which is a diameter of 4 on a square and circle. Which gives me a third idea, to chase, is possibly finding the point of equilibrium on a rectangle. But I have to work through the second, as I’ve already proven the first false. Which that should be any x*y=16 function, but again, that’s probably how they get the area formula, and that’s kind of why it’s easier than the perimeter. Well, actually, maybe not… because it’d also have to be x+y=16. So you’d need both systems, which adds another variable as to why this might be so difficult.
I’m just a philosopher, and very curious. That’s all.

Neifert, B. K.. "How do you correct your incorrections at the end of the day after reflecting and knowing you were wrong?" Answer B. K. Neifert. Quora.com. Web. 6.6.2025

***

Section II

I had just understood, that the area of a circle formula is like Length times Width. But, hold on... a Radius is not the same thing as length. So, you do the same math expression for a rectangle, it will not work, but you do it for a square, it will. Because half the parameter of a square times its radius would equal the area. So this math works for a square, because it is equal, the same that it works for a circle, because it is equal. However, said area formula will not work for a rectangle. Because a rectangle's side lengths are not equal.

Neifert, B. K.. Another Reason P Cannot Equal NP. WordPress.com. Web. Access Date 6.6.2025

***

Section III

I also had a brief thought to use Polynomials, but then started looking at my axiom here in the Squares to Circles (See Section IV) and started exploring if there was a way to generalize a formula from the area of a circle to its perimeter---as such would work, the curve always has a relation to the area. And if the area of an ellipse was related to the two radii, then so must the circumference. So then I started looking at the Area and Perimeter of a Rectangle's relation to its area, and intuited the equation from that, while combining it with my principle of Squares to Circles.

***

Section IV

Section V:

Upon further evaluation, even with the revised formula, a perimeter of an ellipse cannot be solved, except using calculus, because the curve is not always equal to pi. I tested it on two known ellipses, and did not get a consistent result.

Student: Has no knowledge of his subject. Thus, must learn from those with more knowledge.

In a sense, we all are students, but the student is given the mark of having no knowledge. We all begin as students in every field we learn. And we must be humble at it, and learn from instructors.

Instructor: Has knowledge of at least one subject, and can give instruction on that subject.

If seven or more Instructors have agreed, they have the bestowal of gifting a student with the title of "Instructor." And only in that one area of instruction. Yet, the Instructor knows to gain knowledge from his students, as much as instruct them

Meistro: Has expert knowledge on at least one subject, and can innovate it.

If two or more Meistros have agreed, or fourteen or more Instructors, they have the bestowal of gifting an Instructor with the title of "Meistro." And only in that one area of which they are a Meistro. Yet, the Meistro will learn from a student, and does not lord his mastery over any.

The Prodigy: Has expert knowledge on at least seven subjects, and can innovate in all of them.

The Prodigy is given his calling by fourteen Meistros, and fourteen Instructors, two in each field who check his field, that he has true knowledge of his craft. And if fourteen Meistros and fourteen Instructors see he has mastered at least seven subjects, he is a Prodigy. But, the Prodigy will learn even from a student the thing he is most experienced at.

The Sage: Has expert knowledge beyond the Prodigy.

If two Prodigies agree upon the expertise of one Prodigy, that he is gifted in at least four of their shared subjects, and two Meistros agree in each of that Prodigy's subjects, and seven Instructors in each of their subjects, then he is a Sage.

The Compulsory Instructor Credit - An Instructor can become an Instructor, by demonstrating they have taught a subject they know thoroughly, and instilled in their student a correct understanding. That correct understanding must be validated and checked against good sources of knowledge, that the student then understands their subject.

The Prodigy Devaluation: A Prodigy is only a Meistro at his subjects, and is only counted as a Meistro, as well as a Sage is only counted as a a Meistro for his subjects.

The Political Devaluation: There are No Rabbis. Thus, the teaching is led through the gates of free learning, and nothing more, and only right understanding pushes the person's accreditation, and this only for free learning, and nothing practical. To be called a Dr. and also a Meistro shows to the patient that they are well learned, not that the Mastership qualifies them to be a Dr.. For the institutions of man work separately from the institutions of this Free and Open Society.

The weights:

A Student who has learned their subject well, can bestow the gift of Instructor on their Teacher; but the student must be validated by at least three other Instructors to have learned it well. Or validated by fifty Students learning their subject.

Seven Instructors are equal to one Meistro.

The Greeting: Two in this society shall greet, and say, "I am a student", no matter their level be it Prodigy or Sage even. And the one being greeted will say, "I am a student, too." And they shall each tell what they are students of. And if an Instructor, they shall teach the student, and if a student, they shall share what they know with the Instructor. For one can become Instructor by teaching, but not Meistro.

The Parable of the Sage

There was once a sage
Who had wisdom and knowledge;
He saw this litmus
And he said, "I am still just
"A student, I now realize."

The Sage and the False Professor

There was a sage, who
Elite in every subject
Was told by a false
Professor, who said, "I am
"A Prodigy. I arrived."

The Sage replied, "Let
"No man call themselves Meistro
"Or Instructor. I'm 
"But a student, and shall, thus, always be."