Dor_Elbaz

That’s a fair question. I’ve chosen to pursue this work independently because, in my experience, the academic environment I’m currently part of tends to be quite conservative when it comes to unconventional research — especially from undergraduates. I felt the work might not be given fair consideration internally due to its nontraditional model and the fact that it challenges a major open problem.

Instead, I’ve focused on making the argument as rigorous and transparent as possible, including formal proofs, a detailed appendix cross-validating the claims, and a public release for community scrutiny. I’m actively reaching out to experts in the field and submitting the work to appropriate venues.

If it becomes necessary to route through institutional channels — for example, to access formal peer review or academic endorsement — I’ll consider that step as well. For now, I’m hoping the merit of the argument will invite critical engagement on its own.

Not yet. I’ve just publicly released Version 3 of the paper, which addresses all prior critiques and includes formal proofs, simulation lemmas, and a cross-validation appendix.

It’s currently being submitted to the ECCC and arXiv for formal review. I’ve also reached out to a few experts (including Scott Aaronson) and am actively seeking feedback.

I’d be thrilled to hear any comments or critiques you might have — peer review begins with open dialogue. Thanks for asking.