# more stuff on search pattern – coverage and binary

Yeah I think you nailed it; what I was searching for is a simultaneous depth and breadth search.

But to do that, I had to sacrifice Time.

So perhaps it’s a coverage rather than a binary search; or a bit of both really.

I can number them as well.  If I get a few free minutes later, I’ll do a timelapse though; it’s a GREAT idea; I’ll number them as well; maybe i’ll set it to some majestic sounding music so it sounds important; I like doing that.  Makes ppl think I’m smart

I think it’s probably similar to folding paper or a “cut in half, cut that half in half, cut that half in half again” type of thing.  Not sure; this is what my intuition tells me to do mostly but I have a weird intuition… and I hate doing the same motion twice… but I don’t mind crossing over the same lines.

You’d see a timelapse of me drawing it   I’m sure there’s a mathematical explanation that already exists somewhere.

Unlike the “Traveling Salesman” problem, I cross lines freely because, realistically, you do cross lines, repeat work, go over the same spots a few times.  It’s the flaw of P=NP problems; they’re trying to do a tertiary search using binary true/false/law-of-excluded-middle.

All those \$100,000 questions do is ignore the very source of the paradox: simply the “axiom/proof” model of mathematical truth.

Needs the / to be included… the lines crossed over.

But anyway, I’m sure there’s a mathematical way of expressing this as well.  This is my “subjective search” pattern I use when I can’t find my mother in the supermarket (she’s fast) or when I REALLY can’t find something in the house…  or when I want to accomplish a lot of tasks with the least amount of work.

Go as far as you can, cover as much territory as you can on your way back.