Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus
From: Pubkeybreaker (Robert_silverman_at_raytheon.com)
Date: 11/20/05
- Next message: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Previous message: Spamless: "Re: Reduction from FACTORING to SQROOT"
- In reply to: Unruh: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Next in thread: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Reply: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Reply: Milan VXdgsvt: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 19 Nov 2005 18:34:45 -0800
Unruh wrote:
> wangxahq@yahoo.com.cn writes:
>
> >Does that mean that what can be integrated can always be
> >differentiable? The relationship between integral and its different is
Functions exist that are integrable but nowhere differentiable.
Consider a lacunary series, for example.
> NP is not a concept that applies to continuous functions.
Yet more nonsense. The question, for example:
For given x, is x^2 < a is most definitely a decision problem that
is in NP.
>Continuous
> have an infinitely long representation on a computer. ,
This claim is so totally ridiculous as to defy understanding.
Once again, I suggest you consider f(x) = x. It is most definitely
continuous and most definitely has a finite representation.
> and a polynomial in
> infinity makes no sense.
This sentence is just total gibberish. Exactly what is a
'polynomial in infinity'?????
>NP is a concept applied to finite discrete
> problems. It talks about polynomial in the length of the input. A
> continuous function has infinitely long inputs in general.
More nonsense. Any input that you supply to any computer function
is most definitely finite in its representation. A different
representation
might be infinite in length, but the representation actually used, in
whatever
alphabet you choose is most definitely finite.
>
> I have now stated this at least three times, but you keep ignoring the
> posts.
And I keep responding that your posts are nonsense.
And I give concrete examples of why they are nonsense.
But you don't seem to get the message.
In brief: You have ALMOST ZERO understanding of the topics you are
trying to discuss, and you garble the little that you do understand.
- Next message: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Previous message: Spamless: "Re: Reduction from FACTORING to SQROOT"
- In reply to: Unruh: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Next in thread: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Reply: wangxahq_at_yahoo.com.cn: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Reply: Milan VXdgsvt: "Re: can we find one-way trapdoor funcation family from the theory of calculus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|