You wont like my answer and you won't accept it because it steps
   outside of the assumptions of the P NP questions. = I made a
   writeup on the idea March 8th, 2014 that's long winded but I'll
   summarize: a) You have to break the rules. That's the 1st step.
   = That's the pattern to solve it. Treat situations on a
   case-by-case basis and involve real people. The problem comes
   from it being in the realm of thought experiments and looking
   for a Universal solution. But we *have* the universal solution:
   We use it every day. == We utilize it daily. We don't have a
   choice. We live amongst complexity, utilize complex systems in
   our minds and in our relationships with people and information.
   We navigate socially and introspectively alike. We ask other
   people when we're stuck (or force it out of them), and sometimes
   the answer is simply, "I don't know". or "I don't care" - which
   are valid solutions to problems, if unsatisfactory. For example:
   Want to crack a high-encryption NSA code? Look at the situation.
   Find the key players. Kidnap their family. Threaten them with
   death 'til they give you the passwords and SALT required. Its a
   solution. A professor from college sent me a magazine clipping -
   I still have it - about a $100,000 prize for solving Minesweeper
   about 15-18 yrs ago. He put an encouraging sticky note on it:
   "If anybody can do this, you can". I have no idea why he thought
   that. I put it aside 'cause I knew the answers even then and
   it's not the kind of answers they wanted. == The answer is
   sideways: Past the person playing, and behind the game board but
   in front of the CPU: sniff the instruction set and output it so
   the information skips PAST the game board and into the eyes of
   the person playing. That's how you solve it. == Every puzzle can
   be analogized to a maze. Thought experiments, logic experiments,
   mathematical puzzles, they're mazes. The moment you remember
   you're a person in a chair solving this problem and that this
   problem can have solutions OUTSIDE of the context desired by the
   puzzle-maker, your solution set opens up VERY VERY wide. You can
   go down the maze as requested, you can go around the maze, you
   can fold the paper so the START and END of the maze is touching,
   and skip time/space entirely. You can ask your friend to help
   you. You can find the answer online. You can solve it by not
   caring anymore about it and that's just a few. == Another way to
   solve it: Change the math. Newton did it. This new Japanese guy
   apparently solved a problem by inventing a new math but I bet I
   know what makes his new math work: He's creating a NEW LAYER of
   abstraction on top of the existing system. This new layer of
   abstraction gives him the flexibility to make connections that
   are impossible in current mathematics. This is the kind of
   solution I'm talking about. This is how you'd solve N NP,
   Minesweeper etc if the current methods aren't working. Go up a
   level. Step outside of the system you're using. == Anyway, these
   aren't the kinds of answers they want for the P NP problem. I
   solved the Travelling Salesman problem by making a 3D mockup of
   it and sticking a rubber-band around it so the elasticity of the
   rubber-band gave me the shortest path all at once. Sometimes the
   answers are so simple but when people expect complexity, that's
   what they look for and create. ==