Organic Chemistry: The Toblerone Edition

The perfect intersection of science and entertainment, right here. TV shows and movies love to throw random lab equipment together and call it "chemistry," but actual chemists are just sitting there counting the safety violations. That distillation setup would produce exactly zero magic and approximately three lab accidents. The green hair really sells the "I've been exposed to something I shouldn't have" aesthetic. Grant proposal: $500,000 to study why Hollywood can't afford a single chemistry consultant.

Even God is judging your chemistry knowledge! The title "C≣C > :C=C:" is basically saying triple bonds are superior to double bonds. But searching for a quadruple carbon bond? That's crossing a line! Quadruple bonds don't naturally exist between carbon atoms - they max out at triple bonds. It's like trying to find a unicorn in your periodic table. Chemistry students everywhere are feeling this spiritual callout for those late-night desperate Google searches when homework is due in 10 minutes!

Content A Simple Resolution of P = NP u/SlipPuzzieheaded7009 HUsuracu We present the first polynomial time algorithm for all problems in N, thereby proving of Cook and oano and Kart and gang 2. our method extends Valiant and gang's algebraic enumeration techniques 3 and 7 (1014 introduction The P vs NP problem- in Cook's 1971 theorem-provino work 1 and Karo's 1972 compilations of IF-complete problems 2 asks whether every problem whose solution can be verified in (n" time can also be solved in O(n) time We prove P = NP by devising a polv time solver that swn thesises circuit constructions a la vallant and gang.3 with certicate guided branching methods (Papadimitriou and gang 4). Our proof is rigorous and breathtakinglv concise mv wite's bovtriend told me so 5) Preliminaries All prior efforts are trivial and naive. Cook-Levin's reduction I is fine: SAI solvers are cute party tricks: POP theorems 6 are delightful and humorous. None saw the obvious that we have. Vain 'Theorem P= NP Proof Left as an exercise for the reader Results and Discussion SAT. CLIOUE. and Hamiltonian Cycle solved in O(n?) time Acknowledgments Tacknowledse. on bebslf of the entire mathematies community. the unparglleled senius of ruself Reterences . A. "The Complexitv of Theorem-Proving Procedures." STOC '71. ACM. 1971 2. Karp. R. M. "Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems." in Complexity of Computer Valiant, L. G. "The Complexity of Enumeration and Reliability Problems." SIAM J. Comput. vol. 8. no. 3, pp. 410-421. 1979. :contentReference oaicite:2 index=2 4. Papadimitrion. C. H.. et al. *On the Complexity of Local Search in Combinatorial Optimize 6. Arora. S.. Safra. S. Probabilistic Checking of Proofs: A New Characterization of NP"

Medieval alchemists were basically the original chemistry influencers! This dude is in his lab like "Watch me turn this random metal into gold and don't forget to subscribe!" Meanwhile, his apprentices in the back are thinking "Is he still doing this? We've been eating lead-contaminated soup for THREE YEARS." The eternal quest for the Philosopher's Stone was basically history's longest-running failed science experiment - centuries of bearded men mixing dangerous chemicals and being absolutely shocked when gold didn't magically appear. But hey, they accidentally discovered phosphorus and distillation while trying to get rich quick, so... task failed successfully?

The universe really puts things in perspective! While hydrogen and helium make up 99% of all atoms out there, we humans spend our time obsessing over the other 1% - those pesky elements in the periodic table that somehow turned into our chemistry exams, smartphones, and existential crises. Talk about cosmic irony! The universe is basically just hydrogen saying "I'm simple" while we're down here turning the elemental table scraps into both lifesaving medicines and weapons of mass destruction. Maybe we're not the most abundant things in the cosmos, but we're definitely the most dramatically complicated!

The ultimate scientific Venn diagram of insecurity. Physicists mock engineers but secretly wish they could build something useful. Mathematicians can't win Nobel Prizes (because there isn't one for math) but take solace in their theoretical superiority. Engineers just want respect while building everything society depends on. And in the middle? The shared delusion that chemists are somehow inferior despite them literally creating new matter. The academic hierarchy is just high school with lab coats and grant funding.