Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum
From: Mark Nudelman (markn_at_greenwoodsoftware.com)
Date: 01/22/05
- Next message: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: Xcott Craver: "Re: Singular they [was Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns]"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:54:49 -0800
jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> The original algorithm in my program, will, my current analysis shows,
> factor about 50% of the time, which is astounding.
I'm not sure why that's astounding. There are lots of algorithms that
factor numbers 100% of the time.
> I get a sense that some of you don't get it, so let's say you take
> some RSA challenge number, and calculate j and T, and factor them,
> and then run them through the algorithm.
>
> My research indicates you have a 50% chance of factoring the number.
Great, so try it on 7 RSA challenge numbers. You should have a probability
of 127/128 of factoring at least one of them.
But this is useful only if your algorithm can factor in polynomial time.
--Mark
- Next message: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: Xcott Craver: "Re: Singular they [was Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns]"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
