Re: New Way to Factor
From: Will Twentyman (wtwentyman_at_read.my.sig)
Date: 06/14/04
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: (news) Automatic notification of e-mails being read"
- Previous message: Will Twentyman: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- In reply to: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 11:48:50 -0400
Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:
> James Harris wrote:
>
>> Well I've realized that as long as I stick with "pure math" then
>> mathematicians can ignore and lie about my work, but hey, guess what?
>> The world relies on a flawed idea that factoring is a "hard problem"
>> so instead I can shift to the factoring problem, which I did.
>> ...
>> I've talked about it before on sci.crypt but as usual people just
>> called me names, put up unimportant information and in general behaved
>> oddly.
>
>
> That's not true. I for one made a serious effort to
> understand the algorithm you previously posted to
> sci.crypt. However, you never made it clear enough,
> and to the extent I understood it it didn't seem to
> be capable of reliably finding factors of large numbers.
>
> Your latest posting has all the earmarks of a crackpot.
> If you want your ideas to be taken seriously you must
> express them clearly enough to be applied by others,
> and if you don't do that then complaining about the
> reception your ideas get from others is quite misguided.
>
>> Here's a quick demonstration of one part of the theory, and no, it's
>> not the whole thing! As I know that some of you Usenet people will
>> try to lie here, like usual.
>>
>> Example is a factorization of 119 by this method.
>> ...
>> and notice that 519489-84107214 = -83587725, which has 17 as a factor
>> as it equals
>> (-4916925)17
>> and
>> 519489+84107214 = 84626703 = 7(12089529)
>> so I factored 119 by factoring 118, and I call 118 a surrogate.
>
>
> Actually you factored 119 by "reducing" the problem to one
> of factoring 83587725 or 84626703.
Actually, all he is doing is checking the GCD of 119 and each of the
larger numbers (presumably by the Euclidean Algorithm). The fact that
he failed to clearly state that is just one of the flaws in his paper.
Or I could be giving him too much credit.
-- Will Twentyman email: wtwentyman at copper dot net
- Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: (news) Automatic notification of e-mails being read"
- Previous message: Will Twentyman: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- In reply to: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: New Way to Factor"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
