Re: Theory versus implemention, I'm puzzled

From: Christian Bau (christian.bau_at_cbau.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: 02/01/05 

Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:22:53 +0000

In article <1107155306.029220.307840@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
 "guenther.vonKnakspott@gmx.de" <guenther.vonKnakspott@gmx.de> wrote:

> Hey Harris wake up call! You got it even wronger this time. There are
> already enough factorization algorithms around. It actually is of no
> import that you may have come up with a new one. What matters is wether
> it is dramatically better in speed and ressources than the current best
> ones or not. So this time the mathematical proof of the correctness of
> the algorithm is a mere prerequisite. The obstacle standing between you
> and fame and fortune, is the lack of a working implementation. So far,
> it don't look good fer you mister. And no, whining won't be of help
> either.

I must contradict you here. If anyone posts any _new_ algorithm here
that shows some new idea, even if it is not the fastest known algorithm,
I and many other readers would appreciate it. sci.math is not about the
leading edge of mathematics, it is much more about learning.

There is of course in the case of Harris a certain attitude problem. He
behaves like a complete idiot, and gets treated accordingly. But if he
had come with something new and interesting, I am sure it would have
been recognised here. (Apparently he hasn't. Seems he just found a way
to find lots of trial divisors in a completely unpredictable order, and
with enough trial divisors sometimes a factoring is achieved. How sad. )

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Theory versus implemention, Im puzzled
    ... > already enough factorization algorithms around. ... So this time the mathematical proof of the correctness of ... If anyone posts any _new_ algorithm here ... with enough trial divisors sometimes a factoring is achieved. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Theory versus implemention, Im puzzled
    ... You got it even wronger this time. ... > already enough factorization algorithms around. ... is the lack of a working implementation. ... his algorithm was sub-exponential, or even polynomial time. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Theory versus implemention, Im puzzled
    ... You got it even wronger this time. ... > already enough factorization algorithms around. ... is the lack of a working implementation. ... his algorithm was sub-exponential, or even polynomial time. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Suggestions for double-hashing scheme
    ... i.e. the multiplicative group might be of size /2 if p is ... That's what my algorithm is for. ... > factorizations of N-1, which may or may not be fast. ... mathematical proof of primeness that it constructs is understandable. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: I was right, surrogate factoring proof
    ... >> And I did put in my instructions that information. ... >> You didn't follow the algorithm. ... Now I feel like I mapped out a mathematical proof, ... > You can see the PARI implementation, pari is freely downloadable, ...
    (sci.crypt)