Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution
From: Steven (somewherenonexistant_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/09/05
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Proof..."
- Previous message: Owen: "Re: Significance of antinomies"
- In reply to: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Next in thread: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Reply: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Reply: denis feldmann: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 9 Feb 2005 05:26:40 -0800
>Factorization is quite simple. Here is an algorithm for it.
>Input: a composite number n.
>Output: an ordered pair (b,c) such that 1 < b <n, 1 < c < n, and bc =
n.
Why on earth did you post this!!! IF YOU THINK FACTORIZATION IS SO
EASY TRY FACTORING A 500+ DIGIT RSA MODULUS!! Then tell us hhoe easy
it is to win the RSA factoring challenge. According to your reasoning,
the trial-division algorithm is even *simpler*, but it is as slow as
heck. The algorithm you posted (Pollard?) is only marginally better
than trial-division, and unless I am mistaken, the algorithm is
probablistic, meaning it is possible (but not likely) to never return.
Do I need you to tell me that some factorization *ALGORITHMS* are
simple? I did a whole research paper on it!!!
- Next message: Dave Seaman: "Re: Proof..."
- Previous message: Owen: "Re: Significance of antinomies"
- In reply to: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Next in thread: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Reply: David McAnally: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Reply: denis feldmann: "Re: JSH: Easy math, easy solution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|