You are making a Category Error. You are critiquing Physics with Logic.My formalization axiomatizes the Witten-Helffer-Sjöstrand regime because I am modeling COMPUTATION, not ABSTRACTION. In the real world, computation requires traversing a state space.

That traversal is governed by the Spectral Gap.The Proof Logic is rigid:1. If P=NP, then the 'Hardest Possible Landscape' must still be traverseable in Polynomial Time (Polynomial Gap).2. The 'Hardest Possible Landscape' for 3-SAT is a Multi-Well Potential (proven by the existence of local minima).

3. Spectral Geometry proves Multi-Well Potentials enforce an Exponential Gap.$n^{-k}$ cannot equal $e^{-n}$.You are asking: 'But what if there is a magical Turing Machine that ignores the Geometry?'I am answering: 'Then that machine exists outside the laws of Physics.'The axioms aren't 'wrong.' They are Constraints. If you want to believe in P=NP, you have to believe in a geometry that doesn't exist. The Compiler verified the contradiction. The result stands

- Next time we are having a conversation, how about you WAIT for my rebuttal before you "flag" my post you punk bitch?