Re: Surrogate factoring, out of the box

From: C. Bond (cbond_at_ix.netcom.com)
Date: 01/30/05 

Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:49:35 GMT

jstevh@msn.com wrote:

> Well I'll admit that I've been feeling a bit depressed the last couple
> of days, as I had calculations showing at least 50% success with a
> rational x, and then I checked thoroughly and found that my method gave
> a LOT of rational x's, and wasn't factoring with most of them.

Perhaps there was some electromagnetic leakage from the backplane of your
system, causing the depletion layers of the integrated circuits to
decrease. This, of course, would make the success of any operation
dependent on the number of address lines switching during each clock cycle.
That's a much better explanation than the one you gave (and which I snipped
below).

[snip] 

--
There are two things you must never attempt to prove: the unprovable -- and
the obvious.
--
Democracy: The triumph of popularity over principle.
--
http://www.crbond.com