From: JSH on 29 Jun 2010 19:51 When back in 2004 I realized that my research showing a conflict between algebraic integers and the field of complex numbers would not be accepted by mathematicians who would rather be in error, I decided I needed to find something that could not just be ignored, and I thought the factoring problem was that thing. Here we are 6 years later and on a convoluted path I've found methods for handling k^m = q mod N through integer factorization, something I designated surrogate factoring, and I was wrong, as it is, it seems, being ignored! And I realize that years can go by yet again. There is nothing that will work. There is no discovery that will change these people. Nothing. But the world should be ok. Years ago I'd worry a lot but from what I've seen, no matter how much "experts" screw-up, people just keep going about their business, if they can. Like now with the oil spill in the gulf. Experts have no accountability in the modern world. You don't have to be right! You can be complete idiots as long as there is a gang of you, and you say things that aren't true, make claims that aren't true, and risk other people's lives because you know it will not matter for you in the long run. No one really cares. Oddly enough the world can remain quite secure no matter how powerful the mathematical ideas I've found may be because BELIEF controls people to such a degree that no one may bother to exploit the information. Sitting here I realize that knowledge can be a curse in a world where knowledge is not needed to be correct as you look at idiots do well, ripping on people who are right, but it doesn't matter, because most people go with the idiots, so even when disaster strikes, they stick with them, for reasons maybe God only truly knows. But that's the real world. I'll quietly celebrate my own findings like I usually do in a world that does not care, and not worry. I wish I knew years ago what I know now: fools are often safe because of their own stupidity. I'm not worried about the world. James Harris
From: Gordon Burditt on 29 Jun 2010 23:47 >When back in 2004 I realized that my research showing a conflict >between algebraic integers and the field of complex numbers would not >be accepted by mathematicians who would rather be in error, I decided >I needed to find something that could not just be ignored, and I >thought the factoring problem was that thing. Trial division as a method of factoring has been known for a long, long time. Your result is news only if you can prove that it is faster than existing methods. You refuse to consider such a proof and won't learn how to do such a proof with O(n) notation. >Here we are 6 years later and on a convoluted path I've found methods >for handling k^m = q mod N through integer factorization, something I >designated surrogate factoring, and I was wrong, as it is, it seems, >being ignored! The world does not need a method of factoring slower than trial division. Real mathematicians do not read math papers coming from people who do not proofread their work and make frequent errors. >I'm not worried about the world. If you're not worried about the world, then factor an RSA challenge number or something of similar size.
From: Mark Murray on 30 Jun 2010 03:28 On 30/06/2010 00:51, JSH wrote: > When back in 2004 I realized that my research showing a conflict > between algebraic integers and the field of complex numbers would not > be accepted by mathematicians who would rather be in error, I decided > I needed to find something that could not just be ignored, and I > thought the factoring problem was that thing. <Same old rubbish deleted> James is not here to present results; he's here to argue (or to brainstorm; it depends on his mood). He's axiomatically correct in his own mind, so actual debate is of no use. M -- Mark "No Nickname" Murray Notable nebbish, extreme generalist.
From: Simon Johnson on 30 Jun 2010 05:39 > James is not here to present results; he's here to argue (or to > brainstorm; it depends on his mood). He's axiomatically correct > in his own mind, so actual debate is of no use. > The sad thing about these people is that if they put as much effort in to learning as they did in to arguing, they might actually produce something of value. It's ironic that their own superiority complex prevents them from actually becoming superior. Cheers, Simon.
From: Bruce Stephens on 30 Jun 2010 19:01 JSH <jstevh(a)gmail.com> writes: > When back in 2004 I realized that my research showing a conflict > between algebraic integers and the field of complex numbers would not > be accepted by mathematicians who would rather be in error, I decided > I needed to find something that could not just be ignored, and I > thought the factoring problem was that thing. You were right. Show you can factor large (otherwise unfactorable) numbers and that would be very hard to ignore. And to begin with you seemed more optimistic. You tried (not always very successfully) to describe algorithms and (even better) tried to implement them. I don't remember you ever trying to analyze complexity, but that's optional if you can produce a program that runs sufficiently fast. But it didn't work out (because you couldn't actually factor numbers particularly fast), and now you're left giving excuses for not actually doing whatever you're claiming (normally factoring, but currently (for variety) the discrete logarithm problem).
|
Pages: 1 Prev: JSH: So why do they lie? Next: JSH: Solving discrete logarithms |