# Re: JSH: Surrogate Factoring Fails Completely, What Next?

From: David Eather (eather_at_tpg.com.au)
Date: 04/21/05

```Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 22:30:57 +1000

```

jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> Proginoskes wrote:
>> jstevh@msn.com wrote:
>>> Proginoskes wrote:
>>>> jst...@msn.com wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> The SFT as a theorem is unique in terms of that
>>>>> approach to the factoring problem, showing that
>>>>> you can use rationals.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've stepped outside of the box.
>>>>
>>>> And off the cliff.
>>>>
>>>
>>> More social crap, which I've seen his highly
>>> effective in convincing people of things that are
>>> not true.
>>
>> You use it on me, so I use it on you.
>>
>>>> You don't believe in moderation, do you? It always
>>>> has to be one extreme or another.
>>>>
>>>>> Now, let's consider your claim as the SFT maps
>>>>> factors, and if it is not practical, then it maps
>>>>> factors in a biased way.
>>>>>
>>>>> But assume then that there is another theorem
>>>>> that does not.
>>>>
>>>> Find it. And show that there IS a way to get
>>>> NON-TRIVIAL factors. Then
>>>> people will listen to you for once.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The SFT maps hyperbolas to each other.
>>
>> Duh.
>>
>>> Now if you graph a hyperbola, it turns out that what
>>> can be considered trivial and non-trivial factors
>>> occur with rational solutions equally.
>>>
>>> There is no preference shown, and why should there be?
>>>
>>> This issue of triviality is a human issue driven by
>>> economic and social issues.
>>
>> Mathematics DOES care about "preferences".
>>
>> For instance, when is the remainder of (n-1)! when divided by n equal
>> to n-1?
>>
>>
>>> The mathematics has no reason and no capacity to hide non-trivial
>>> factors so that RSA can be secure.
>>
>> Once again you've got it backwards. RSA is only used BECAUSE
>> factoring is difficult. They didn't pick a scheme and then put out a
>> bunch of propaganda that factoring is actually difficult.
>>
>> And once again, you're just talking. If factoring was easy, and SF
>> could be used to factor, ANYONE can factor the RSA numbers, break
>> into accounts, etc.
>>
>> Do you really think that there's a world-wide conspiracy covering up
>> all of these break-ins? No. But if factoring is easy, you'd have to
>> accept the conspiracy, because there's no news about it.
>>
>> --- Christopher Heckman
>>
>
> The SFT points you in the right direction, but you still might have to
> work things out to make it practical.
>
> My analogy is to the atomic bomb.
>
> There was the theory that indicated it was possible, but a research
> effort was still needed to build a working atom bomb.
>
> In reply I get people telling me to factor an RSA number.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

An RSA number??? - *YOU CAN'T SHOW YOUR WORKING STEPS TO FACTOR 15!!!*
You're an ignoramus, surrounded by a delusion, wrap in an abusive
personality.
can plonk them

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

iQA/AwUBQmec9ZS9Fk5okqe7EQIw7gCePe9G3xMs56r5QV2qeWDz8WQuW1gAn3Va
ZrYU1TiCGMJUPl7RuQ14at+e
=wnEE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>
> That isn't a rational response.
>
> A rational response might be asking me why I'm so certain the theory
> is important, and exactly why do I think it could lead to practical
> factoring.
>
> That would put me in the position of laying out details about my
> assertions and having to prove them, and then they could each be
> critiqued, and shown to be correct or faulty.
>
> Instead, posters make a lot of replies, often derisive, where they
> make their own claims, often false ones, like usually just claiming
> to have refuted my claims, often without really referring back to
> what I actually say.
>
> Then it's a degenerate conversation--not really a conversation--but
> people talking at the subject.
>
> That strategy works with "pure math" as I learned as I watched my
> research on non-polynomial factorization get trashed and watched as
> the lies flew about my prime counting function, and it didn't matter
> what I could actually prove to people who had social positions and
> the will to post and post and post and just lie continually about
> even basic mathematics.
>
> Here, it's about time. Given time I fear that more evidence than you
> would ever want will crop up that someone did the math, broke the
> factoring problem, and then went on to exploit that solution.
>
> And, quite a few people who would like to crack the factoring problem,
> wouldn't give a damn about the RSA prizes, as they'd have either the
> potential to make much more money illicitly, or they'd be, well,
> people who have other aims in mind.
>
> The world needs to deal with the math before it's forced upon it.
>
> I say yesterday would have been good, but since I'm still having to
> talk this out on Usenet, today would be a good start.
>
>
> James Harris

## Relevant Pages

• Re: JSH: Ethics of a factoring solution
... When you post one of your solutions to the factoring problem there are ... Remember that I can find a solution to the RSA problem with a simple ... due warning and allowed time to change to a more secure method. ...
(sci.crypt)
• Re: JSH: Surrogate Factoring Fails Completely, What Next?
... RSA is only used BECAUSE ... > propaganda that factoring is actually difficult. ... A rational response might be asking me why I'm so certain the theory is ... That strategy works with "pure math" as I learned as I watched my ...
(sci.crypt)
• Re: JSH: Why factoring solution must work
... Given the plus or minus in the original equations, ... Either you did the math wrong or selectively picked plus or minus at ... Further it is clear now that solving the factoring problem is simpler ...
(sci.math)
• Re: JSH: Ethics of a factoring solution
... When you post one of your solutions to the factoring problem there are ... Remember that I can find a solution to the RSA problem with a simple ... due warning and allowed time to change to a more secure method. ...
(sci.crypt)
• Re: JSH: Ethics of a factoring solution
... When you post one of your solutions to the factoring problem there are ... Remember that I can find a solution to the RSA problem with a simple ... have to wait five years or so after publishing the factors of the RSA ...
(sci.crypt)