Re: Surrogate factoring approach, analysis

jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 01/22/05 

Date: 21 Jan 2005 15:15:51 -0800

tomstdenis@gmail.com wrote:
> jst...@msn.com wrote:
> > > By way of comparison, using Cygwin on my 2.66Ghz XP box, the
> "factor"
> > > command correctly factors 137305167623353 in 202 milliseconds.
> >
> > I wrote a prototype test program to test out my new factoring
method.
>
> No, you solved factoring remember? Your program wasn't a prototype.
> It was THE solution.
>

No you stupid person. The paper is THE solution, or was supposed to
be, though my research found I'd found a 50% solution, in that it will
work 50% of the time, which is astounding in and of itself.

The program was always a prototype mainly meant to demonstrate that the
ideas in the paper actually work--you do get factorizations.

Now, I don't think you have an ounce of sense or real mathematical
ability, so you will probably just say something silly in response, not
realizing that I'm talking about an actual paper, an actual program,
and actual results.

The theory I have so far factors 50% of the time because of quadratic
residues.

That's provable mathematically.

Now you can keep chattering all you wish and it won't change a thing.

Remember, you're the crank here. I have an actual paper, and an actual
program implementing ideas from that paper.

You on the other hand are just talking.

If you wish to do something, talk some math. Attack the theory in my
paper. Explain why my claim of 50% factoring is wrong.

Do something besides talk...oh, wait. You can't, now can you?

If you had any ability, you would show it.
ALL you can do is talk, so that's what you do.

James Harris

Relevant Pages
Quantcast