Can anybody finish this position without computer help?

I tryed a lot this exercise but I could not give checkmate. If anyone with more experience can help solving this position I would be thankful.

It is extremely complicated with white on move (which is the standard assumption) and very simple with black on move. You will learn nothing by trying to solve it - you will fail - and you might learn a little bit by just playing the solution from a tablebase (https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=8/8/8/8/2N4p/7N/2K5/k7_w_-_-_0_1). You will have to play hundreds of these endgames (2N vs P) before you will get a feel for how to approach them in varying configurations. MARattigan may have some hints for you; he is the expert on this material.

Btw, the solution with all the relevant viariations would take many pages to post here and you will never play them. Just pick the moves with the lowest DTM for white and the highest DTM for black in syzygy which will give you the main line.

Btw2, nobody will give you this for an exercise except to demonstrate how tiny and powerless your brain is in the face of the big challenges of the universe

Arisktotle, thanks a lot for the help. This exercise is in the material of this site. I am discovering ways of improving and I do not know what is impossible for mortals to solve and what is not because for beginners everything seems to be very hard. I will try to solve other instructive exercises.

You are welcome! If the exercise was intended for beginners then you may find that the instructions gave black on move. Then it's mate in 5 which is quite doable.

And your opponent had like ... 5 seconds second on the clock? And together you made this great contribution to endgame theory? Incredible!

Dont waste your time on those stuffs.

It happens 1 in million games or 1 in billion games.

Train rook endgames. Mastering common endgame will improve rating.

Still fail to see the value of that experience. Checkmating from this position takes 56 full moves which means that your opponent put up a poor defense. Since this is not a games forum, people will be looking for educational and high quality endgame fragments. You didn't reproduce yours and I doubt you could have mined the depths of its secrets with 7 seconds on the clock.

Ah, you have my kind of out of the box intelligence! If you are anything like AlphaZero I await your appearance on the world stage with great expectations (sorry, took that from Dickens).

Nevertheless, the value of endgame study always depends on quality play by both sides of the aisle. I know nothing about the intelligence of your opponent. That is why I stopped playing chess games. They never deliver perfect answers of ultimate truths. 

Once I have completed this drill without computer help,
though it took me a month to study it. I learnt some common patterns

from tablebases, and sometimes I am able to beat it.

69AlphaMale109: The best players are better than things like Stockfish and most of them don't even get much exposure / airtime unless they look for it.

Maybe you should read up on this. Since over 20 years engines like SF comfortably beat humans and have ELO-ratings hundreds of points above Carlsen. They don't get much airtime anymore since the chessworld has accepted their "superiority". All grandmasters use a chess engine in their preparations, all problem and endgame composers use an engine and so do all analysts. Only live commentators in chess events hide the engines in the lowest drawer since it will make their commentaries look stupid and their presence redundant.

Occasionally engines look bad because limited versions are used for sites such as chess.com or in online tournament analysis and probably in apps by now. The standard chess engines also are not very efficient when solving compositions with long move series, weird positions or seemingly illogical strategies. Their "thinking" is mostly based on game play. There are however several chess programs for these special areas.

The real, full version of Stockfish which is used in tournaments has an ELO-rating of about 3500. Your ELO-rating is 1800. You will probably draw 1 in 100,000 games against SF and lose the rest.

A month sounds about right!

You cannot beat a sound table base except from a winning position. They are mathematically perfect.

You are not better than 1800 unless you prove it by raising your ELO-rating. I explained to you that many SF versions are limited in some way. Yours is apparently limited in many ways.

Engines like SF have beaten humans on all levels and they (the humans) are so sick of it that they don't play them anymore except on a low level - which is like amputating the right leg of a 100 meter runner.

For the rest I take SpiderUnicorns advice until you can face the facts. 

SF heard your claims, feels ashamed and retired from chess.

Uhm where do you play stockfish on?

Yeah I know that, I suspected it was a troll when I saw it was created 4 days ago, which means it's an alt of someone made to post and troll here

I mean just look at his name, it's obviously a troll

Yeah I've been noticing the "I'm superior than all humans" kind of posts

True