JSH: Some history
in [Math]
|
Prev: nearness to the Nucleus of the Atom Totality Chapter 4, Missing Mass #227 Atom Totality
Next: 3SAT - Super Resolution
From: Mark Murray on 22 Jul 2010 11:05 On 07/22/10 15:31, JSH wrote: > Fine. Use WHATEVER YOU WANT, and solve for m, when 2^m = 52 mod 103. > SHOW YOUR WORK. OK. I used the Pohlig-Hellman algorithm (well, I used software that uses the P-H algorithm). The individual steps are at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pohlig-Hellman_algorithm The program to do this is at http://www.alpertron.com.ar/DILOG.HTM .... where full source is available. I entered 2 into "base", 52 into "power" and 103 into "mod". In a time too short to measure, I got the answer exp: 50 period: 51 .... telling me that the complete set of answers is given by m = 50 + 51 n .... where n is any integer. If n = 1 it gives the 101 that you say is "the answer". > It's a math thing. That is a challenge math people understand. > > SHOW YOUR WORK. > > Chatter is not enough here. DO THE PROBLEM OR ADMIT YOU CANNOT. No doubt the above will not satisfy you. So, in preparation, will you accept a manual demonstration of the P-H algorithm? M
From: rossum on 22 Jul 2010 11:29 On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 07:15:37 -0700 (PDT), JSH <jstevh(a)gmail.com> wrote: >The answer is m = 101. Wrong again James. One of the answers is 101. Others are 50, 152, 203 etc. rossum
From: Arte Atem on 22 Jul 2010 13:51 "rossum" <rossum48(a)coldmail.com> wrote in message news:qnog46l9nummdubj3unrl5lbqp1lr1nasa(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 07:15:37 -0700 (PDT), JSH <jstevh(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >>The answer is m = 101. > Wrong again James. One of the answers is 101. Others are 50, 152, > 203 etc. > > rossum > See? it is not a 1 to 1 mapping - useless for encryption.
From: Arte Atem on 22 Jul 2010 13:54 "Mark Murray" <w.h.oami(a)example.com> wrote in message news:4c485e3e$0$2531$da0feed9(a)news.zen.co.uk... > On 07/22/10 15:31, JSH wrote: >> Fine. Use WHATEVER YOU WANT, and solve for m, when 2^m = 52 mod 103. >> SHOW YOUR WORK. > > OK. > > I used the Pohlig-Hellman algorithm (well, I used software that uses > the P-H algorithm). > > The individual steps are at > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pohlig-Hellman_algorithm > > The program to do this is at > > http://www.alpertron.com.ar/DILOG.HTM > > ... where full source is available. > > > > I entered 2 into "base", 52 into "power" and 103 into "mod". > > In a time too short to measure, I got the answer > > exp: 50 > period: 51 > > ... telling me that the complete set of answers is given by > > m = 50 + 51 n > > ... where n is any integer. If n = 1 it gives the 101 that you > say is "the answer". > >> It's a math thing. That is a challenge math people understand. >> >> SHOW YOUR WORK. >> >> Chatter is not enough here. DO THE PROBLEM OR ADMIT YOU CANNOT. > > No doubt the above will not satisfy you. So, in preparation, will you > accept a manual demonstration of the P-H algorithm? > > M > you both are missing the bigger point. Mod functions have multiple solutions they are not a one to one mapping, therefore useless for encryption
From: Mark Murray on 22 Jul 2010 14:02
On 22/07/2010 18:54, Arte Atem wrote: > you both are missing the bigger point. > Mod functions have multiple solutions > they are not a one to one mapping, > therefore useless for encryption So far (except for some wild claims by JSH), crypto has not been a functional part of the debate. HOWEVER, DH and RSH /do/ use these mod functions; The result used is the primary or "smallest" one. If the range is limited to this primary value the the function /is/ one-to-one. M -- Mark "No Nickname" Murray Notable nebbish, extreme generalist. |