Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #29280 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-17 01:40 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-19 19:43 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 74 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript
Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 01:40 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 02:20 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-17 16:24 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 09:03 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 09:17 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 11:32 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 00:13 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 04:10 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-18 01:20 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-18 12:16 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-18 11:25 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-18 12:43 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 04:18 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 04:25 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-18 09:52 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-18 19:23 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-18 10:48 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-18 13:09 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 13:14 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-18 22:45 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 14:23 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-18 22:56 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 15:02 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 16:04 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 02:42 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 23:34 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 01:34 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-19 06:23 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 07:10 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 07:15 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 08:34 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-19 16:54 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-19 08:57 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 10:18 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-19 10:59 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 01:33 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-20 02:10 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-20 02:21 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-20 10:45 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-20 06:43 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 15:21 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 03:18 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2016-01-21 12:12 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-21 23:20 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 19:44 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-23 21:50 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 01:26 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-23 17:54 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@no-spam.ws> - 2016-01-24 13:34 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-25 00:21 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 03:08 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-24 19:35 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 03:53 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-18 19:32 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-17 19:51 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-17 13:43 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2016-01-17 12:46 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-18 09:50 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-18 20:09 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-18 19:28 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-18 21:37 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 13:12 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 13:46 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2016-01-18 14:00 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-19 13:47 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-01-19 14:04 +0000
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-19 19:59 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:55 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-19 20:04 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 13:42 -0800
Re: Primality sieve challenge Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-21 17:21 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-03 19:52 +0100
Re: Primality sieve challenge Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-19 19:43 +0000
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 01:40 -0800 |
| Subject | Primality sieve challenge |
| Message-ID | <5b608a56-e16b-4467-a0ce-4e30f6796920@googlegroups.com> |
Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than that in memory, and i guess Reducing composites in the integer field http://jt.node365.se/composite.html I've made my own kind of primality sieve that work by reducing lthe number field into composite "legs" and prime "egs". The legs that contain just composites in the numberfield will be thrown away sieved? I asked the people at sci.math if there was a known upper limit for the reduction using this type of counters in the integer field, they said no. I wonder if there is a name for this type of sieve/counter within information theory? My idea is to find a base with very high percentage of composite legs, remove all start numbers that produce only composites in their legs, and then store the other egs that contain prime in an array. That array will than serve the purpose modelling the new integer field, using the searched base with highest composite reduction. The script seaching the bases take a few seconds, so there could be alot of improvements. I have a feeling that using bignumb bases as sieves will be out of range for us mere mortals, but who knows maybe for computer theorists.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 02:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <28ee7293-3afa-41f5-a3c6-e83a0bfa82de@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29280 |
Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 10:41:03 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than that in memory, and i guess > > Reducing composites in the integer field > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html > > > I've made my own kind of primality sieve that work by reducing lthe number field into composite "legs" and prime "egs". The legs that contain just composites in the numberfield will be thrown away sieved? > > I asked the people at sci.math if there was a known upper limit for the reduction using this type of counters in the integer field, they said no. > > I wonder if there is a name for this type of sieve/counter within information theory? > > My idea is to find a base with very high percentage of composite legs, remove all start numbers that produce only composites in their legs, and then store the other egs that contain prime in an array. > > That array will than serve the purpose modelling the new integer field, using the searched base with highest composite reduction. > > > The script seaching the bases take a few seconds, so there could be alot of improvements. I have a feeling that using bignumb bases as sieves will be out of range for us mere mortals, but who knows maybe for computer theorists. At least i am impressed how well it reduce the composite integer field but of course you need a big array... The math guys said just construct the base using the primes 2*3*5*7*11*13*17... and so on. NEWBASE = 510510 ------------------------------------------ BASE= 510510 Composite legs= 92.91551585669234% =============== One could say it is a bit clumsy but i think it is neat be able to peel of numbers that do not even need to be considered for primality test.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 16:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <871t9gfa2z.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #29280 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion > upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than > that in memory, and i guess > > Reducing composites in the integer field > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html Why don't you engage with what people say? That function called factor_it is very peculiar. What is it supposed to do? <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 09:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8b01caa9-8c09-4e69-915b-81b67eba7edc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29285 |
Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 17:24:33 UTC+1 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion > > upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than > > that in memory, and i guess > > > > Reducing composites in the integer field > > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html > > Why don't you engage with what people say? That function called > factor_it is very peculiar. What is it supposed to do? > > <snip> > -- > Ben. Here you can see what it does. http://jt.node365.se/composit_llegs.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 09:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0b16c016-5128-4b68-8046-fbec55700ec3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29286 |
Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:03:19 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 17:24:33 UTC+1 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > > > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion > > > upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than > > > that in memory, and i guess > > > > > > Reducing composites in the integer field > > > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html > > > > Why don't you engage with what people say? That function called > > factor_it is very peculiar. What is it supposed to do? > > > > <snip> > > -- > > Ben. > > Here you can see what it does. > > http://jt.node365.se/composit_llegs.html It is a primality check algorithm. What the algorithm do is to reduce the search space by filter out the composites it can reduce the search space with 2 magnitudes. It can filter out 99% of the composite numbers in the integer field given a good *big* base. It *will* store the primeleg vectors in an array and throw away the composite legs. Right now it just printout the perentage for each base. But it will store startvalues for the primelegs. But i was a bit to optimistic before didn't check high enough. NEWBASE = 510510 ------------------------------------------ BASE= 510510 Composite legs= 81.94863959569841% =============== But still not that bad. At least i am impressed how well it reduce the composite integer field but of course you need a big array... The math guys said just construct the base using the primes 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17... and so on. One could say it is a bit clumsy but i think it is neat be able to peel of numbers that do not even need to be considered for primality test. I wonder if i am correct assuming that the integers will be reduced with. 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17 so using base 510510 the integers will be reduced with. 1/2+1/3+1/5+1/7+1/11+1/13+1/17... adding next prime to list, so the reduction will go on forever using the sieve as the base gets higher and higher. No that adds up to 1.40284617343... So what is the forumula calculating the reduction? 1/2 -1/3-1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... +1/3 -1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... +1/5 -1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... +1/7 -1/11-1/13-1/17... +1/11 -1/13-1/17... +1/13 -1/17... +1/17 -... Is that it? =========== It seem holding/storing the counter values->vectors in an array for bases up to 10^10 will be no problem. Given 64-bit integers it would take 4 GB. ========================================= 1 10 4 2 100 25 3 1,000 168 4 10,000 1,229 5 100,000 9,592 6 1,000,000 78,498 7 10,000,000 664,579 8 100,000,000 5,761,455 9 1,000,000,000 50,847,534 10 10,000,000,000 455,052,511 11 100,000,000,000 4,118,054,813 12 1,000,000,000,000 37,607,912,018
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 09:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <60329a65-27f8-483e-bd6e-e262e952ee6f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29287 |
Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:17:43 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:03:19 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 17:24:33 UTC+1 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > > > > > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion > > > > upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than > > > > that in memory, and i guess > > > > > > > > Reducing composites in the integer field > > > > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html > > > > > > Why don't you engage with what people say? That function called > > > factor_it is very peculiar. What is it supposed to do? > > > > > > <snip> > > > -- > > > Ben. > > > > Here you can see what it does. > > > > http://jt.node365.se/composit_llegs.html > > It is a primality check algorithm. > > What the algorithm do is to reduce the search space by filter out the composites it can reduce the search space with 2 magnitudes. It can filter out 99% of the composite numbers in the integer field given a good *big* base. > > It *will* store the primeleg vectors in an array and throw away the composite legs. > > Right now it just printout the perentage for each base. But it will store startvalues for the primelegs. > > But i was a bit to optimistic before didn't check high enough. > NEWBASE = 510510 ------------------------------------------ > BASE= 510510 Composite legs= 81.94863959569841% =============== > > But still not that bad. At least i am impressed how well it reduce the composite integer field but of course you need a big array... > > The math guys said just construct the base using the primes 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17... and so on. > > One could say it is a bit clumsy but i think it is neat be able to peel of numbers that do not even need to be considered for primality test. > > I wonder if i am correct assuming that the integers will be reduced with. > 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17 so using base 510510 the integers will be reduced with. > 1/2+1/3+1/5+1/7+1/11+1/13+1/17... adding next prime to list, so the reduction will go on forever using the sieve as the base gets higher and higher. > No that adds up to 1.40284617343... > So what is the forumula calculating the reduction? > > 1/2 -1/3-1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > +1/3 -1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > +1/5 -1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > +1/7 -1/11-1/13-1/17... > +1/11 -1/13-1/17... > +1/13 -1/17... > +1/17 -... > > Is that it? > =========== > It seem holding/storing the counter values->vectors in an array for bases up to 10^10 will be no problem. > > Given 64-bit integers it would take 4 GB. > ========================================= > > 1 10 4 > 2 100 25 > 3 1,000 168 > 4 10,000 1,229 > 5 100,000 9,592 > 6 1,000,000 78,498 > 7 10,000,000 664,579 > 8 100,000,000 5,761,455 > 9 1,000,000,000 50,847,534 > 10 10,000,000,000 455,052,511 > 11 100,000,000,000 4,118,054,813 > 12 1,000,000,000,000 37,607,912,018 In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear time if you check out my baseconversion. This is just removing numbers not necessary to check.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 11:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8e6d61cd-7fb5-4ec7-88aa-f2dbfcdd7120@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29288 |
Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:22:19 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:17:43 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 18:03:19 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com: > > > Den söndag 17 januari 2016 kl. 17:24:33 UTC+1 skrev Ben Bacarisse: > > > > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > > > > > > > > > Maybe we could have a challenge finding the base with best reducion > > > > > upto 100 000000? One probably do not want to store more vectors than > > > > > that in memory, and i guess > > > > > > > > > > Reducing composites in the integer field > > > > > http://jt.node365.se/composite.html > > > > > > > > Why don't you engage with what people say? That function called > > > > factor_it is very peculiar. What is it supposed to do? > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > -- > > > > Ben. > > > > > > Here you can see what it does. > > > > > > http://jt.node365.se/composit_llegs.html > > > > It is a primality check algorithm. > > > > What the algorithm do is to reduce the search space by filter out the composites it can reduce the search space with 2 magnitudes. It can filter out 99% of the composite numbers in the integer field given a good *big* base. > > > > It *will* store the primeleg vectors in an array and throw away the composite legs. > > > > Right now it just printout the perentage for each base. But it will store startvalues for the primelegs. > > > > But i was a bit to optimistic before didn't check high enough. > > NEWBASE = 510510 ------------------------------------------ > > BASE= 510510 Composite legs= 81.94863959569841% =============== > > > > But still not that bad. At least i am impressed how well it reduce the composite integer field but of course you need a big array... > > > > The math guys said just construct the base using the primes 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17... and so on. > > > > One could say it is a bit clumsy but i think it is neat be able to peel of numbers that do not even need to be considered for primality test. > > > > I wonder if i am correct assuming that the integers will be reduced with. > > 510510=2*3*5*7*11*13*17 so using base 510510 the integers will be reduced with. > > 1/2+1/3+1/5+1/7+1/11+1/13+1/17... adding next prime to list, so the reduction will go on forever using the sieve as the base gets higher and higher. > > No that adds up to 1.40284617343... > > So what is the forumula calculating the reduction? > > > > 1/2 -1/3-1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > > +1/3 -1/5-1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > > +1/5 -1/7-1/11-1/13-1/17... > > +1/7 -1/11-1/13-1/17... > > +1/11 -1/13-1/17... > > +1/13 -1/17... > > +1/17 -... > > > > Is that it? > > =========== > > It seem holding/storing the counter values->vectors in an array for bases up to 10^10 will be no problem. > > > > Given 64-bit integers it would take 4 GB. > > ========================================= > > > > 1 10 4 > > 2 100 25 > > 3 1,000 168 > > 4 10,000 1,229 > > 5 100,000 9,592 > > 6 1,000,000 78,498 > > 7 10,000,000 664,579 > > 8 100,000,000 5,761,455 > > 9 1,000,000,000 50,847,534 > > 10 10,000,000,000 455,052,511 > > 11 100,000,000,000 4,118,054,813 > > 12 1,000,000,000,000 37,607,912,018 > > In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear time if you check out my baseconversion. This is just removing numbers not necessary to check. http://jt.node365.se/baseconversion13.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 00:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n7h777$1pm$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #29288 |
On 01/17/2016 18:22, jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote: > In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear time Congratulations, you just solved the RSA problem. - stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 04:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0c95d268-1a42-429c-acf8-cd22418bd48b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29296 |
Den måndag 18 januari 2016 kl. 00:13:51 UTC+1 skrev Stefan Weiss: > On 01/17/2016 18:22, jonas.thornvall@gmail.com wrote: > > In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear time > > Congratulations, you just solved the RSA problem. > > > - stefan Unfortunately noone solve the RSA problem, what one can do is put the RSA security at jeopardy. Generally that doesn't seem to be a good idea and that is probably why it never reached public knowledge. They do not mind you doing some parallell computing trying to reach the calculation power to overcome it, they do not even mind you refining existing approaches. Because they can always add a few bits. But if you ever were to solve it in some form of quasi linear time boy your in trouble. http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1794022656/tt0120749?ref_=tt_ov_i
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 01:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <871t9fd6p7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #29288 |
jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: <snip> > In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear > time if you check out my baseconversion. Linear in what (i.e. what property of the integers is the algorithm's run-time a linear function of)? (For the record, I don't believe you, but I'd like to know exactly what it is I don't believe.) -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 12:16 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA5937CEFD5E87eejj99@194.109.6.166> |
| In reply to | #29298 |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in comp.lang.javascript: > jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: > <snip> >> In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear >> time if you check out my baseconversion. > > Linear in what (i.e. what property of the integers is the algorithm's > run-time a linear function of)? (For the record, I don't believe you, > but I'd like to know exactly what it is I don't believe.) Is there any other time than "linear time"? Methinks not even Albert E. envisioned curved time, so Jonas T. must be ahead of his time. Lately the multiple universes theory made negative time possible, hearing Alex Vilenkin <https://youtu.be/ZHEp855NS6c>, however also negative time is probably just as linear, [discounting time in cosmic-inflationary times]. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 11:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8760yrb03o.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #29304 |
"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> writes: > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in > comp.lang.javascript: > >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes: >> <snip> >>> In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear >>> time if you check out my baseconversion. >> >> Linear in what (i.e. what property of the integers is the algorithm's >> run-time a linear function of)? (For the record, I don't believe you, >> but I'd like to know exactly what it is I don't believe.) > > Is there any other time than "linear time"? Maybe my humour detector is fault, but my question seems perfectly reasonable. Saying that a computation on integers that is linear in the magnitude of its argument is not the same as saying that it is linear in the bit-width of its argument. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 12:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA59381750CE96eejj99@194.109.6.166> |
| In reply to | #29305 |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in comp.lang.javascript: >> Is there any other time than "linear time"? > > Maybe my humour detector is fault, but my question seems perfectly > reasonable. You are so right, or aren't you? There has never been humour in linear thought in our time, or has there? > Saying that a computation on integers that is linear in the > magnitude of its argument is not the same as saying that it is linear in > the bit-width of its argument. Arguments preferably being reasonably reasonable in magnitude, that is not reasonably the same as linearity in time, or is it? btw, a "Primality" sieve ??? -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 04:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f49fc396-8f45-47cd-a4ab-36531b2af3f4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29306 |
Den måndag 18 januari 2016 kl. 12:43:32 UTC+1 skrev Evertjan.: > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in > comp.lang.javascript: > > >> Is there any other time than "linear time"? > > > > Maybe my humour detector is fault, but my question seems perfectly > > reasonable. > > You are so right, or aren't you? > > There has never been humour in linear thought in our time, or has there? > > > Saying that a computation on integers that is linear in the > > magnitude of its argument is not the same as saying that it is linear in > > the bit-width of its argument. > > Arguments preferably being reasonably reasonable in magnitude, > that is not reasonably the same as linearity in time, or is it? > > btw, a "Primality" sieve ??? > > -- > Evertjan. > The Netherlands. > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) Well i do not know what to call it a composite sieve, it doesn't actually sieve out the numbers, it just filter out composite #vectors?# from the positive integer field. If you have a better name share it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jonas.thornvall@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 04:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e86a61b6-f3ab-4618-974d-378ca2e30038@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29306 |
Den måndag 18 januari 2016 kl. 12:43:32 UTC+1 skrev Evertjan.: > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in > comp.lang.javascript: > > >> Is there any other time than "linear time"? > > > > Maybe my humour detector is fault, but my question seems perfectly > > reasonable. > > You are so right, or aren't you? > > There has never been humour in linear thought in our time, or has there? > > > Saying that a computation on integers that is linear in the > > magnitude of its argument is not the same as saying that it is linear in > > the bit-width of its argument. > > Arguments preferably being reasonably reasonable in magnitude, > that is not reasonably the same as linearity in time, or is it? > > btw, a "Primality" sieve ??? > > -- > Evertjan. > The Netherlands. > (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIsEKuOxrcw
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 09:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ih9q9b9hn97rstn00pcq8mgttf84ftgk71@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #29304 |
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:16:54 +0100, "Evertjan."
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
>Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in
>comp.lang.javascript:
>
>> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
>> <snip>
>>> In fact i already implemented the tools to factor an integer in linear
>>> time if you check out my baseconversion.
>>
>> Linear in what (i.e. what property of the integers is the algorithm's
>> run-time a linear function of)? (For the record, I don't believe you,
>> but I'd like to know exactly what it is I don't believe.)
>
>Is there any other time than "linear time"?
Yes, of course. It might be a language issue. Execution in
"linear time" means O(n).
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 19:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA593C548780B7eejj99@194.109.6.166> |
| In reply to | #29316 |
Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in comp.lang.javascript: >>Is there any other time than "linear time"? > > Yes, of course. "Of course" as in "I cannot explain, but you have to trust my gut-feeling"? > It might be a language issue. What might be? Is there an issue here? > Execution in "linear time" means O(n). Sorry, what is O(n)? Please do not use your own definitions in a discussion. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 10:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7af3b313-b72f-4dfb-a7cb-4b03a29e5429@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29320 |
On Monday, January 18, 2016 at 12:23:37 PM UTC-6, Evertjan. wrote: > Sorry, what is O(n)? > > Please do not use your own definitions in a discussion. This is not something he just made up: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 13:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <gukq9bdam69pinh9q10djlq43vv8mv3a55@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #29320 |
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:23:37 +0100, "Evertjan."
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
>Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote on 18 Jan 2016 in
>comp.lang.javascript:
>
>>>Is there any other time than "linear time"?
>>
>> Yes, of course.
>
>"Of course" as in "I cannot explain,
>but you have to trust my gut-feeling"?
No. If you knew what O(n) was, then you would understood that
the n might be sometime else such as "n^2"; "O(n^2)" is quadratic
time.
>> It might be a language issue.
>
>What might be? Is there an issue here?
Your not understanding. While your English is good, you do
occasionally miss things.
>> Execution in "linear time" means O(n).
>
>Sorry, what is O(n)?
>
>Please do not use your own definitions in a discussion.
Where did I use my own definition? O(n) is using big-O notation.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation for the explanation.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 13:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <57bd7c90-81fd-4fe9-b329-1d58db4ff3f1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #29329 |
Gene Wirchenko wrote: > Evertjan wrote: >> Please do not use your own definitions in a discussion. > > Where did I use my own definition? O(n) is using big-O notation. > > See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation for the explanation. And note that this notation is very commonly used when discussing algorithms. This is not at all an unusual notion of Gene's -- Scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript
csiph-web