On Jun 23, 6:43=A0pm, JSH <jst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 4:41=A0pm, mike3 <mike4...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 9:55=A0pm, JSH <jst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 22, 8:29=A0pm, Rotwang <sg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > On 23 Jun, 04:17, JSH <jst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 22, 7:01 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > On Jun 22, 3:29 pm, JSH <jst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Jun 22, 2:50 pm, mike3 <mike4...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Without a real demonstration the only assumption that can
r=
easonably
> > > > > > > > be made is your claim Has No Substance To It!!!!!!
>
> > > > > > > Why? =A0What would a demonstration prove?
>
> > > > > > It would prove that you have something worthwhile.
>
> > > > > So what if I don't demonstrate with a factorization of a very
lar=
ge
> > > > > number? =A0What does that prove?
>
> > > > It proves that you don't learn from your mistakes.
>
> > > Yawn. =A0And you do? =A0If so, why are you replying to me now?
>
> > > If I could demonstrate with a large factorization I would have done
> > > it.
>
> > > I can't.
>
> > So you concede that your algorithm is not capable of doing this,
> > and so even if it works it is no better than conventional methods?
>
> I said, I can't.
>
> > Thank you.
>
> > Concession accepted.
>
> Ok. =A0If that will shut you up, then fine.
>
> This thread was first about my loss of concern about surrogate
> factoring and then I decided to hedge a bit by noting that I'd figured
> out a way that could give you the odd prime p at the size needed.
>
> My concern was that suddenly there was an easy route popping up, but
> now I'm less concerned again.
>
> The issue here is not about whether or not any of you knuckleheads
> believe me but whether or not there could be a very fast factoring
> method possible from this research that takes the world by complete
> surprise.
>
> That's it.
>
> I do not care if I'm wrong. =A0I sleep easier then. =A0I am often wrong.
>
> The exercise here was just a worry burp. =A0I'm less concerned yet again
> as I've done some theorizing on the subject and it seems to me that
> still there would be low odds of getting the odd prime p that you
> need, right?
>
> If not, then, sorry world, I tried. =A0Now I'm off to do other things.
>
> If you want to celebrate my failure then fine. =A0I fail a lot so there
> is so much celebrating possible about my failures for people like you.
>
I would quite like to see you have some kind of success. That's why I
often encourage you to take the trouble to study some mathematics.
Anyway, I hope you find something worthwhile and constructive to do
with your time.
|
