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.