OK, no-one has still bothered to state what 'n' stands for (I'm assuming p = price) but it all sounds highly plausible.
I wrote that upthread. Here it is again.
It is the number of unique addresses from the blockchain.info chart. And Peter R showed that n^2 correlates with price p. This is Metcalf's Law and Reed's Law.
I had explained in an upthread post that if we use a ruler on the n chart along the bottoms since 2012, then should currently be at 100,000 yet it is currently at 150,000.
Also there was a divergence since February where p declined but n rose. That divergence must be resolved. Will p rise or n decline?
If n must drop by 33%, then p price could drop to 0.67 x 0.67 = 45% of recent p (inconclusive to determine which recent p to multiply by .045, perhaps $450 - $600).
I also projected the bottom from July 2012 using compounding and I also get a $300 to $350 target for the bottom within next 2 weeks.
$450 is a lot closer to the bottom than $600 was. Risto is correct about that.