Re: JSH: Now what?

Tim Peters wrote:
[cut sci.crypt]

[jstevh@xxxxxxx]
...
If you want to show real mathematical ability versus just playing at
it--as if all mathematics is, is acting--why don't you talk about why
it's key that my current research has the modular inverse?

It's not key, because this method isn't what you hope it is.


You didn't give anything before. Just babbled a bit about
trivialities.

Show what you know.

Already did, and you rejected the opportunity to learn something real.
That's fine. No more from me on this one until you take the good advice
already given:

Try it. Start with a product of distinct odd primes, so you
can check where you get stuck against the theory above.

Still waiting.

There wasn't anything of mathematical interest in what you posted.

And you didn't address anything from the method I stepped out.

You keep waiting then. I think you overvalue your own input.

I am only interested if you can actually point out failure. In the
past you have been useful in doing so.

Being recalcitrant here, you are of no use to me.


James Harris

.