Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote: > A two-page, literally unreadable text with nothing in it (at least > that did not get mangled) even remotely similar to anything related to > computational complexity theory is not something you can get feedback > on. > It is actually even impossible to see *what* it is you want feedback > on.
I prefer to think of it as the middle 20 pages somehow got cut out, since the geometry had to be somehow related to computational complexity...
-- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
