Re: Surrogate factoring, theory versus implementation
From: Xcott Craver (caj_at_B-r-a-i-n-H-z.com)
Date: 01/23/05
- Next message: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: article on schools of foundations of mathematics"
- Previous message: Student911: "Re: Help needed understanding dx,dy terms in integrals"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Surrogate factoring, theory versus implementation"
- Next in thread: C. Bond: "Re: Surrogate factoring, theory versus implementation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:44:33 GMT
<jstevh@msn.com> wrote:
>
>I've checked the theory, and it's not wrong.
>
>Maybe I messed up in checking my own theory, so it seems reasonable
>that I might suppose that if there were any serious people on these
>groups with a modicum of interest that they might go check the theory
>and point out any errors in it.
>
>I don't see that happening.
That's because they are waiting for you to factor an RSA challenge,
which you could do if your math was correct.
The onus is upon you to concretely prove that you have an efficient
algorithm. The only way you can really do this is running it
on a large composite which other people cannot factor.
If you cannot do this, then arguably you have not solved the
factoring problem.
--Xcott
- Next message: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: article on schools of foundations of mathematics"
- Previous message: Student911: "Re: Help needed understanding dx,dy terms in integrals"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Surrogate factoring, theory versus implementation"
- Next in thread: C. Bond: "Re: Surrogate factoring, theory versus implementation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
