Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 From: Unruh <unruhspam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Date: 1 Apr 2006 05:46:19 GMT
contini@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Unruh wrote:
b) Your observation forms the basis of the method of a poster here called Stevens who
keeps posting that he has solved the factoring problem. So far he has not
managed to factor any large numbers, despite claiming to have
revolutionised the subject.
Ie, the observation is a very old one. Unfortunately noone has managed to
find a way to use it to make factoring any easier. ( Well, if you happen to
choose your number so that it is one less than some square, then of course
this method says it is very weak.)
To the original poster: please ignore the these comments.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Just because one mad
person has tried to use the method in an insane way should not
discredit all of
the real researchers who have used the method in clever ways. In other
words,
Unruh's assessment is misleading.
Which part is misleading? Has someone found a way to use it to make
factoring any easier? Who?
.
 FollowUps:
 Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 From: Phil Carmody
 Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 References:
 Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 From: contini
 Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 Prev by Date: Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 Next by Date: Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 Previous by thread: Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 Next by thread: Re: Factoring large composite numbers
 Index(es):
Relevant Pages
