[rawling]

The paper doesn't answer the problem in its title (n²+1) but demonstrates two different "advancements" towards it (n²+2)

> We have posed a fine (in our opinion) open problem and reported two distinct “behold-style” proofs of our advance on this problem.

There's also a linked PDF which, if I'm reading it correctly, trivially proves n²+1 is impossible.

[kevinwang]

No, n^2+1 is an open problem (conjectured to be impossible though)

[rawling]

Ah yeah, the PDF shows it for n=2 and I assumed that scaled up but it doesn't.