Re: Factoring problem, solved
tomstdenis_at_gmail.com
Date: 01/23/05
- Previous message: Aldar C-F. Chan: "Re: from random oracle model to pseudorandom oracle model"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 22 Jan 2005 20:03:34 -0800
> Your behavior is puzzling. Explaining out the mathematical details
> does not work with you people. If pushed, you will simply go into
> blanket denial, if an argument is stepped out to the point that you
are
> forced to see--if you pay attention at all--that it is correct.
It's not so much as people are denying your work as they are
questioning the conclusions.
You claimed to "solve factoring" then your claims turn out to be false.
You claimed to have turned this problem on it's head yet cannot
produce even the trivial of factors in [e.g. say 128-bit composites].
Nobody is denying that's your meddling with factoring. People are just
not accepting that you've achieved anything worth mentioning.
As for the oddity that is usenet you are right. Originally I was
ignoring your posts and pushing others todo the same. It turns out
that usenet truly isn't the forum for serious discussion.
So what you really ought to do is just ignore usenet. As you routinely
ramble on time and time again it's not helping you. So write your
papers, get published and ignore the "noise" [as you put it] that is
usenet.
Tom
- Previous message: Aldar C-F. Chan: "Re: from random oracle model to pseudorandom oracle model"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Next in thread: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Reply: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|