Ok, I get it now. You're basically playing around with the complexity factor by bounding the universe of possible solutions (programs) such that it will only gr

Ok, I get it now. You're basically playing around with the complexity factor by bounding the universe of possible solutions (programs) such that it will only grow polynomially. And assuming that because P=NP, the size-bound programs you try are guaranteed to find an answer, all without depending on the size of the input. But I think the only relevance of the P VS NP problem is in whether or not we can find answer to NP problems in a "timely" fashion (as the article defines it: before the end of the universe), and I think one could show that this strategy (the name is universal search) doesn't guarantee that for any practical hardware we can envisage, now or in the future - the number of steps is just far too great for any interesting problem, even if it's not nearly as bad as exponentially growing (being less bad is not enough)?