The Show goes on Just the Same - despite the spam attacks

On Jun 25, 2:05 am, Jeff Dege <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:17:56 -0700, AdaCrypt wrote:
On Jun 24, 9:20 pm, Jeff Dege <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

After all this time, I am still at a loss as to

1: how your system actually works, and

2: why you believe that a system involving discrete numbers in multiple
dimensions is somehow more complex than a system involving discrete
numbers in a single dimension.

Essentially it means using a vector analogue (one of an infinite set)
to replace the (very constrained)scalar representation of ASCII and
thus enable vector methods to be used on that scalar so as to perform
the encryption transformation instead of the very transparent methods
of scalar-number-theoretic methods.

You're still dealing with discrete numbers, not continuous. And discrete
numbers are either countable or countably infinite, regardless of the
number of dimensions. That is, they can all be mapped one-to-one to the
set of integers, regardless of whether you express them as fractions,
coordinates in a 11-dimensional vector space, or whatever.

So why do you imagine that there's some fundamental difference between
working in multiple dimensions versus working in one?

--
if 2 + 2 == 5 then 5 == 4- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi again,

Numerical analysis is categorically not possible on vector data.

I think I see what is causing you confusion.

1) The three large integers that comprise the visible cipehertext have
within them another set of three mumbers that are the 'real'
ciphertext.

2) there is no relationship between the two sets by studious design so
that anything that is found empirically by mapping of the externally
visible set cannot be extended to the embedded real ciphertext within.

3) In both cases however it is not correct to map the numbers
individually to the traditional set of integers because the set of
integers that you have in mind are a) on an 'arbitrary' traditional
number line, mapping like that will be always be a bijection for all
integers ? b) The numbers are a set - a set of direction ratios that
is meaningless if split up.

4) As stated, you cannot separate the numbers of the ciphertext in any
set of coefficients of any vector - one in isolation of the other two
- because jointly in this case, they define the direction of a
directed number line that contains the image integer and there is no
numerical relation between a) the combined set of three coefficients
and a single integer on the directed line or b) between any of the
coefficients on its own and a single integer on the directed number
line.

5) the directed line implied by the external set of three integers in
the visible cipher text is going to be totally different to any of the
infinite set of other directed lines within the set as elements of
itself so that extrapolation of any results even if they could be
obtained from the visible ciphertext is not possible.

This is the analytical treatment of something that is axiomatically
evident by vector geometry.

The fundamental difference is the mistake that I am labouring that was
made long ago - using an arbitrary number line was wrong - they should
have used a directed number line and then have used the position
vector of each of the numbers on such a directed line as an analogue
substitute for the numbers them selves as I am doing, for the powerful
reason that numerical analysis is ruled out aotomatically by doing
this.

The analysis of 'arbitrary' number lines does not apply to the
analysis of *directed* number lines - Try this please and come back -
Regards - Austin O' Byrne.

Your post is very useful - thanks -adacrypt

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
    ... when you would miss one along the dimensions of a space ... In my post "are the space-time continuous or discrete", ... continuity from mathematics. ... understand without me having to take a BSc in Physics? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Non Abelian Universe?
    ... differs drastically from GR classical mechanics. ... geometry known as multisymplectic geometry. ... of discrete Planck units, not a continuous circle described by ... A closed path, or curve, C, in two dimensions, acquires a third ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Non Abelian Universe?
    ... differs drastically from GR classical mechanics. ... as multisymplectic geometry. ... of discrete Planck units, not a continuous circle described by ... A closed path, or curve, C, in two dimensions, acquires a third ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Simplicity of it - Adacrypt
    ... why you believe that a system involving discrete numbers in multiple ... dimensions is somehow more complex than a system involving discrete ... numbers are either countable or countably infinite, regardless of the ...
    (sci.crypt)