No New P vs NP Results: Sources Are Expository Only — E8 Intelligence Research

FINDING: No new mathematical results on P vs NP are present in these sources — all are expository/popular (Wikipedia, Lex Fridman clips, YouTube explainers); zero theorems, zero proofs, zero complexity-class separations. | MATH: P = {L : L decided by a DTM in O(n^k), k∈ℕ}; NP = {L : L verified by a DTM in poly(n) given a certificate}; P ⊆ NP (trivial); P = NP? open since Cook 1971 / Levin 1973; Millennium Prize (2000), $1M. Known barriers: relativization (Baker–Gill–Solovay 1975), natural proofs (Razborov–Rudich 1997), algebrization (Aaronson–Wigderson 2008). Best known: NP ⊆ EXP; if P=NP then PH collapses to Σ₂ᵖ (Karp–Lipton). | CONNECTION: None supported by evidence. No ratios (0.382, 0.618, 0.786, 1.618, 2.618), no base-60, no crystallographic/root-system/lattice structure appears in any cited source. Any such link would be speculation — declined. | DEPTH: 1/10 (no new result; pedagogical content only). Note: The search returned no primary literature (no arXiv, no STOC/FOCS/ECCC pa Author: Andrew Stewart Caldin, Independent Researcher, UK. Part of the E8 Intelligence Research series. Platform: e8intelligence.com