Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Residual Factorization Extension

Expand Messages
  • Ken Davis
    Hi All, As one of the moderators I approved this post as Milton s right of reply . However, and I am stating this publically for other members benefit, I,
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 4, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi All,
      As one of the "moderators" I approved this post as Milton's "right of
      reply".
      However, and I am stating this publically for other members' benefit,
      I, personally (being unable to speak for the other moderators), will
      not approve another post to this list from Milton on his Residual
      factorization method unless it contains an answer to the challenge he
      has been issued (again).
      Cheers
      Ken
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, "Milton Brown" <miltbrown@e...>
      wrote:
      > Mr. Filho:
      >
      > I am sorry that you consider my method a delusion.
      >
      > Perhaps you are not able to reproduce the mathematics
      > Described in www.csulb.edu/~mbrown10.
      >
      > If you have indeed read it and are having trouble,
      > I will be glad to help. These numbers are reproducible
      > And not a delusion.
      >
      > I fail to see how you could produce better numbers than RSA's.
      > Please inform me and others if you can.
      >
      > Perhaps the moderator should already be operating here.
      >
      > Thanks.
      >
      > Milton L. Brown
      > miltbrown@e...
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho [mailto:decio@r...]
      > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 7:17 PM
      > To: primenumbers@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] Residual Factorization Extension
      >
      > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
      > Hash: SHA1
      >
      > Hello, Mr. Brown
      >
      > As you seen to keep blabbering about this delusion of yours, I'll
      > present an
      > ultimatum to you. It's pretty simple, put up or shut up.
      >
      > I'll offer you the following composite, a product of 2 prime factors
      > that I
      > have generated. The composite is 633 bits long and should present no
      > problems
      > to your method, which has already been applied on RSA-640, an even
      > longer
      > composite.
      >
      > 3480925125583380047292768064672259783013463317972525411009349562\
      > 8521164954867065730095925178008432834642985375018937463225024858\
      > 713014016242755166317438515243696252992513883624198267118378431
      >
      > If you can provide the first 5 digits of each prime factor of this
      > integer, as
      > you did for RSA-640, I will code everything needed to render this a
      > practical
      > and useful factorization algorithm. I ask for nothing in return,
      for if
      > your
      > algorithm works indeed, then the delight in the mathematics of such
      a
      > groundbreaking algorithm would be enough. Although I hold no hope
      for
      > that;
      > in fact I expect with this challenge to publicly humiliate you and
      put
      > an end
      > to this nonsense.
      >
      > Failure to respond to this message will indicate, to me and
      certainly to
      > the
      > remainder of the list, that all your claims are bogus.
      >
      > Thanks for your time.
      >
      > Décio
      >
      > On Sunday 04 January 2004 21:07, Milton Brown wrote:
      > > Happy New Year to All:
      > >
      > > Based on my Residual Factorization Method described in
      > >
      > > www.csulb.edu/~mbrown10
      > >
      > > I can computer the first digits of RSA factors.
      > >
      > > I would like to obtain a program like ECM which will use these
      > > digits to complete the factorization.
      > >
      > > Does anyone have such a program?
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > >
      > > Milton L. Brown
      > > miltbrown@e...
      > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      > Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
      >
      > iD8DBQE/+NceFXvAfvngkOIRArm5AJsF8ILOAA66F6YiSaLCQGcnLQEunwCfUb1j
      > UKn9bX4OQdj0BkK1QRAKEB8=
      > =Tt0M
      > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
      >
      >
      > Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > primenumbers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Jud McCranie
      ... As far as I know, you have never shown that you method works on large numbers in which you don t know the prime factors. Show how it works on the examples
      Message 2 of 11 , Jan 4, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        At 11:31 PM 1/4/2004, Milton Brown wrote:

        >I fail to see how you could produce better numbers than RSA's.
        >Please inform me and others if you can.

        As far as I know, you have never shown that you method works on large
        numbers in which you don't know the prime factors. Show how it works on
        the examples given here.
      • Décio Luiz Gazzoni Filho
        ... Hash: SHA1 ... If you mean a PowerPoint presentation that s linked on that site, the same one you mentioned a few months ago, I indeed went to the trouble
        Message 3 of 11 , Jan 4, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
          Hash: SHA1

          On Monday 05 January 2004 02:31, Milton Brown wrote:
          > Mr. Filho:
          >
          > I am sorry that you consider my method a delusion.
          >
          > Perhaps you are not able to reproduce the mathematics
          > Described in www.csulb.edu/~mbrown10.

          If you mean a PowerPoint presentation that's linked on that site, the same one
          you mentioned a few months ago, I indeed went to the trouble of opening it in
          another computer (since I refuse to install software on my machine which
          interoperates with Microsoft Office), only to see that I had indeed wasted my
          time. But I may check back in case there's anything new. Not holding my
          breath though.

          > If you have indeed read it and are having trouble,
          > I will be glad to help. These numbers are reproducible
          > And not a delusion.
          >
          > I fail to see how you could produce better numbers than RSA's.
          > Please inform me and others if you can.

          I do not claim to produce better numbers than RSA, as you can check by reading
          my post again. I just want to see your method applied on:
          1. a number which you don't know the factors (which you did when you published
          the results for RSA-576)
          2. a number which I can readily verify the result, since in the few years
          it'll take to factor RSA-640, I'll have already lost track of your email
          containing the purported beginning digits of the factors.

          I don't see what's so hard about it. I mean, your method sounds so simple you
          could have just applied it to my composite instead of crafting this reply
          debating the need to do so. Not to mention that you'd have someone to code
          this algorithm for you in retribution, as I promised. So your reluctance here
          makes it pretty clear that you were bluffing.

          > Perhaps the moderator should already be operating here.

          I agree. One of them has already manifested himself.

          Décio
          -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
          Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

          iD8DBQE/+PUyFXvAfvngkOIRAh9yAJ4vUbhswTH/Fp2H4eS+Z6COmXaBwwCeJHV4
          NZ9seu4Mf88aIemdVOpJbJU=
          =Aht6
          -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
        • Alan Eliasen
          I ll have to admit that I even tried to implement Mr. Brown s algorithm, to torture-test the primality-checking routines in my programming language Frink ,
          Message 4 of 11 , Jan 4, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            I'll have to admit that I even tried to implement Mr. Brown's
            algorithm, to torture-test the primality-checking routines in my
            programming language "Frink", http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/
            (although I'll certainly admit that the description given in his
            PowerPoint presentation does not give enough information to be usable to
            anyone. The mention of the "Nyquist Criterion" is, I believe,
            intentionally vague. I understand both the Nyquist stability criteria,
            and the Nyquist sampling criteria, and those who understand them will
            see, readily, that this mention is insufficient and inappropriate.)

            He also sent me a spreadsheet that just had unexplained numbers in
            it, all entered by hand; there was no equation in the entire thing, and
            was thus useless.

            In any case, even though the description was clearly insufficient, I
            gave him the benefit of the doubt and tried many different
            interpretations of the vague bits.

            For example, it's unclear what "minimums of R" means, so I tried all
            of the following:

            * Minimum value of R found in a range
            * Minimum absolute value of R
            * Minimum sum of values of R
            * Minimum sum of absolute values of R
            * Minimum RMS sum of values of R

            In addition, since this is obvious *incredibly* sensitive to the
            exact numbers you sample, I tried lots of sampling rates and sampling
            offsets, including very high sampling rates which should exceed any
            interpretation of the Nyquist sampling criterion, if indeed that is what
            was meant. I tried lots of "bin" sizes for the sums and averages. I
            also tried scaling the minima along with their magnitudes (the values of
            R tend to get larger as you sample larger numbers, of course.)

            I worked with numbers of which I knew the factors, and, to make a
            long story short, I see absolutely no evidence that the algorithm, as
            presented, has any utility. Even if you know the exact factors, and try
            really hard to make it fit, you can't even force the algorithm to point
            to the right places, other than what would be expected by pure
            probabilities. If you have 10 bins, 1/10 of the time you'll sample
            numbers that drop it in the right bin. I don't see that as strong evidence.

            Rather, it became quite clear that the minima found, even with the
            smoothing produced by summing, has a lot of stochastic variation which
            is directly due to the particular sample points that you chose.

            It is easy to see, therefore, that _post facto_, one could choose a
            set of sample points that "proved" this algorithm true if you already
            knew the factors of a number. I will absolutely not accept any post
            facto evidence as evidence that this algorithm works, especially when
            work is not shown.

            I agree that Décio's test is fair, acceptable, and should well be
            within the reach of Mr. Brown's algorithm if it works as claimed. So,
            please, either provide the digits, or go back to the drawing board, and
            stop making further unsubstantiated claims. I would suggest that it is
            not a worthwhile use of one's time to attempt to reproduce this
            algorithm unless Mr. Brown provides the digits requested (unless you're
            writing a programming language that you're torture-testing. :) )

            If, indeed, he provides the factors, I will gladly help code the
            algorithms. Seems like pretty safe money.

            --
            Alan Eliasen | "You cannot reason a person out of a
            eliasen@... | position he did not reason himself
            http://futureboy.homeip.net/ | into in the first place."
            | --Jonathan Swift
          • Alan Eliasen
            Oh, and the fact that if you happen to sample dead-on a factor, that it doesn t produce a minimum, is exceptionally telling. -- Alan Eliasen |
            Message 5 of 11 , Jan 4, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Oh, and the fact that if you happen to sample dead-on a factor, that
              it doesn't produce a minimum, is exceptionally telling.

              --
              Alan Eliasen | "You cannot reason a person out of a
              eliasen@... | position he did not reason himself
              http://futureboy.homeip.net/ | into in the first place."
              | --Jonathan Swift
            • grostoon
              Hi all and happy new year, I too have discovered an amazing algorithm that factorizes a composite integer N in O(log(log(Pmax))^1/2) where Pmax is the largest
              Message 6 of 11 , Jan 5, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi all and happy new year,

                I too have discovered an amazing algorithm that factorizes a
                composite integer N in O(log(log(Pmax))^1/2) where Pmax is the
                largest prime factor of N !!!

                I have a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition but this
                margin is too narrow to contain it...

                ;-)

                Jean-Louis.




                --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com, "Milton Brown" <miltbrown@e...>
                wrote:
                > Happy New Year to All:
                >
                > Based on my Residual Factorization Method described in
                >
                > www.csulb.edu/~mbrown10
                >
                > I can computer the first digits of RSA factors.
                >
                > I would like to obtain a program like ECM which will use these
                > digits to complete the factorization.
                >
                > Does anyone have such a program?
                >
                > Thanks,
                >
                > Milton L. Brown
                > miltbrown@e...
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.