Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum
From: Richard Henry (rphenry_at_home.com)
Date: 01/22/05
- Next message: Richard Henry: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: How I operate, surrogate factoring"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Next in thread: Tim Smith: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: Tim Smith: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: Gib Bogle: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:45:21 -0800
<jstevh@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1106411780.564349.169950@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Mark Nudelman wrote:
> > jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> > > The original algorithm in my program, will, my current analysis
> shows,
> > > factor about 50% of the time, which is astounding.
> >
> > I'm not sure why that's astounding. There are lots of algorithms
> that
> > factor numbers 100% of the time.
> >
>
> Yeah but my algorithm does it in polynomial time.
Have you proven that point?
- Next message: Richard Henry: "Re: Factoring problem, solved"
- Previous message: David Kastrup: "Re: How I operate, surrogate factoring"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Next in thread: Tim Smith: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: Tim Smith: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Reply: Gib Bogle: "Re: Basically a sieve method, relation to quantum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
