> It's just the formal proof that missing. That's the only thing that actually matters. You've demonstrated something analogous to the following: "Claim: ther

> It's just the formal proof that missing. That's the only thing that actually matters. You've demonstrated something analogous to the following: "Claim: there are no numbers larger than 100,000,000,000,000,000." You've then gone and checked all the numbers from 1 to 10 million, concluded that it's true, and then just say that we're missing a formal proof. I don't mean to be rude, but from an actual mathematical point of view, you've basically demonstrated nothing. 10 million is mindboggling tiny when it comes to all the numbers. Consider this counterexample to Polya's conjecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQCUPQdi6DY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQCUPQdi6DY Or so many other examples: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/514/conjectures-that-have-been-disproved-with-extremely-large-counterexamples https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/514/conjectures-tha...