Trurl
-
Posts
420 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Trurl
-
This picture sums up my work. If you wonder why I put so much effort and posted so much about this problem, it is because the application of this problem. This is several problems and techniques. Every post has been to address something in the breaking of RSA. Now the problem is applied to Prime numbers and their distribution. If you graph the equation, Prime numbers will occur around zero. Any known Prime number multiplied by test value should result in zero when the test number is also a Prime number. If you graph the equation of the Pappy Craylar conjecture and graph the inverse of this graph, it may very well be that it is a Tracy-Widom distribution. There are many applications. I only list some new ones here. I once stated back in 2006 that a logarithmic spiral could be used to represent Prime numbers. I still believe that even though how original that idea may be. I see the graph as a resonating circular function. This circular function would increase in value but with harmonics that occasionally dampen it. If the equation does not convince you I completely understand. I must find the ultimate proof by breaking RSA. Breaking it will improve my programming skills. If you wonder why I did not just do that at the start. The fact remains I have the math, but crunching the numbers takes considerable programming skills. But the RSA numbers are still available, even though, the prize money for solving them has expired.
-
I think the problem with finding a pattern of Primes is that we are looking for the pattern the way we count. It isn’t enough to identify a number Prime. Finding the next in line is still recursive.
If anyone is interested I’ll post more on this topic. Or if you encountered similar roadblocks please share.
-
Well in my post “Simple Yet Interesting” if the Pappy Craylar conjecture is true and we can factor SemiPrimes, then we can take a known Prime say 3 and test or graph from zero to infinity and we’re the value approaches zero the number is Prime.
It can be confirmed by testing other Prime numbers.
This is why I posted the chart of number in the SYI thread. There is a pattern. You can find all Prime numbers.
But what is not yet found is a pattern that will explain the difference in subtraction of Prime numbers. That is the recursion I was referring to.
-
-
Well I used the word speculation to mean I don’t have a scientific study. I was basing my view on facts of my education experience and what situations I know and what other teachers have told me in discussions. But you miss understand me. Being an online teacher is to avoid the disciplining of the classroom. Picture Arnold Schwarzenegger on the first day of class of Kindergarten Cop. Teachers to there credit are managing classrooms and students behavior more often than the art of instruction. I want to practice instruction without the headache of bad student behavior. Teachers salary was discussed because you mentioned it. My original question was to find legitimate places for teaching adults or high school online.
-
Story time: When I was in 5th grade 3 students were sent to an empty classroom to take a make up test. Soon one came back and said the other 2 just left the building. Then a kid in the classroom pointed them out and the class came to the window and watched them for minutes as they ran through the woods. How does a teacher teach while they are trying to get the kids back? That is a mild example. And you can’t use traditional methods today like when there is a fight; let them use boxing gloves to wear it out of them. You don’t want a military type of discipline but those are mild disruptions in my stories. Kids like the school shooting profiles start this way. I don’t know how to fix it. I figured if an online student interfered with the feed it would be recorded and I could just block them. Again from just speculation: teaching is more managing the classroom than the instruction of students. Teaching is a leadership position. (Especially in secondary school) That is why I’d prefer to teach adults where there is a emphasis on instruction and not classroom management. I want a classroom where the students know how to behave as students.
-
I’m speaking with speculation, but one of the worst things I have heard goes back to discipline. Teachers aren’t given methods to control the classroom. When teaching adults the usually want to be in the classroom. If not grades and money (in tuition) will motivate them. Adolescents are not motivated the same way. When rewards don’t work and class is still disrupted how do you handle it? Money is important. But if you aren’t given tools to stop disruptive behavior you can’t teach. And thing like test scores and graduation rates is your fault. Again in speculation, higher pay will not correct this problem.
-
You sound like a teacher. I guess it differs state to state but in my area teachers make a decent wage. It is the substitute teachers that don’t and they use them to fill teachers’ positions. All a substitute teacher needs is a bachelors degree. They lowered the certification to fill openings. But you are right that does lower wages. I felt that working online would be easier to control the classroom. I am not skilled at giving detentions and unruly kids. I’d rather work with adults. I guess now is the best time to find a job in education. If I was going to take a class, I agree that in person is better. I have taken online classes and all the work was left up to me. The professor just graded me telling me I did it all wrong. I had nothing such as other student’s work to compare. The comments did not show what was wrong except minor grammar. The videos on YouTube are way more educational. But you don’t earn a degree watching YouTube. I have some ideas that I would use to improve online courses. Online courses are not cheaper than in person but the instructors usually don’t give instruction. With modern internet technology this should not be so. You made a good point that math instruction is difficult remotely, but why doesn’t the classroom share a document in real time in a chat room? What is your take on this?
-
There is a shortage of teachers. What would be a legitimate online school to teach for? I am not a secondary school teacher but I am asking about cyber schools both secondary and post secondary schools. What are trusted employers? How do you apply? One challenge to secondary schools is disciplining the classroom. I assume the online format would correct this. But if anyone knows of teaching positions in a legitimate online school post it.
-
iNow, I know it seems link a cowardly response. I am just saying NATO should have done more before it escalated. Sometimes you can’t just talk, you have to back it up. Well the Ukraine has backed it up and stood up to the bully. But how can NATO help them? I ask that question because it is this thread’s question? I don’t know what you can do but talk to the other side. Did you study the Vietnam War in high school? Both sides blew each other up until the U.S. left. Now we’re friends. They don’t teach the part on how peace happened. Could it all just have been avoided?
-
That isn’t a source. It is my speculation. I think NATO failed the Ukraines. The U.S. says the Russians are going to invade. We’re are the peace talks? We send weapons and intelligence. Both won’t stop the Russians. We should have flooded the country with humanitarian aid. What is Ukraine’s plan to win this war? Now the woman and children are displaced. I believe for the world to maintain peace both Ukraine and Taiwan would have to be released from NATO in a bargaining agreement. I know the Ukraine and Taiwan are not part of NATO so they only receive aid. But I think the NATO countries know they can’t protect them without disaster. So NATO is forced to slow the progression of war and hope a solution presents itself over time. I stated that the world can be as safe and peaceful without the entire world being a democracy. We can spread democracy peacefully through the people changing their own country. But there is a fine line between peaceful influence and pissing off Russia or China. Again this is all my speculation. I don’t have any intel other than the media and internet. But this is my view of the positions of Ukraine and Taiwan.
-
Ok. I was reading this thread and someone rant on a rant about the left and communism. Maybe this reply can be moved. But I remember somewhere I say something somewhere else that described the World was safer when there was a balance of power throughout the World. I speculate that NATO didn’t act in Ukraine because it was the safer think to do.
-
I love freedom and democracy but is it right for every country? Strategically probably not. Did George W. Bush do this with Husain? Sure it would be great to give democracy and stop the spread of communism. But wasn’t that be Vietnam? Every country is to blame. Let’s “spread democracy” and kill thousands on both sides until it isn’t profitable. And what is the purpose of Pelosi of ticking of China? That is no better than rocket man launching or Iran threatening to building a nuclear program. I would say the people of other countries would love democracy. But the leaders are threatened by it. To put it in relation to psychology, it is like having an atheist believe. How will a country react to the fact outsiders want to change the rules? Not a smart move to force beliefs on anyone. On both sides.
-
I have attached a PDF to view. I know it could be formatted more clearly. But if the Pappy Craylar Hypothesis is true: We can verify a number is Prime by multiplying it by a known Prime number and see if a Semi-Prime results. And we may be able to take a known Prime and see which consecutive number will result in a Semi-Prime, thus establishing a pattern. This pattern is seen in the PDF I posted by taking the error of the equation when (p^4 / ((p*Data)^2 + p)). I know it is hard to see in my PDF. I’m working to make it easier to read. I have been reading a book that said if there is a pattern in Prime numbers the Riemann Hypothesis is false. And if Prime numbers are completely random the Riemann Hypothesis is true. But the question is do you have a pattern if you can predict where the next Prime number occurs? I ask this because there may be a computation to find the next Prime number, but the overall placement of all Prime numbers may be arbitrary. @studiot : This is what I was describing in my status update. 20220622ProofSFN.pdf
-
I first got interested in the math of cryptography in 2006. I stated a logarithmic spiral could be manipulated to find a pattern in Prime numbers. Geometrically I couldn’t make it happen. However, I am now reading a book and found that Gauss tried to relate a pattern of Prime numbers logarithmically.
I also read that if you find a pattern in Prime numbers you disprove the Riemann Hypothesis. I don’t know why but for some reason it only works if Prime numbers are random. Then I thought, “what kind of pattern.” You know they say, “One man’s random sequence is another man’s pattern.” And a pattern is in the eye of the beholder.
As I have stated in my “simple yet interesting” post I claim to have proven the Pappy Craylar Hypothesis and in the proof a pattern of Primes can be found. Of course, I completely understand why no one believes me. It sounds simple yet interesting enough, but not believable. If it were true I would have just rendered most encryption useless to claim a million dollar prize. Even to me that sounds unbelievable. Not that my work can actually do that, but I think it is a new way to think of Prime numbers. But I think to find a pattern in Prime numbers Trumps the need for new key generations.
I know ahead of time I will get posts that the Pappy Craylar Conjecture can’t do what I say. I just want people to work it through. To get people to read your work Trumps them laughing at you.
All things considered if there is credibility to my work, I could get it published. That is why I post it; so a cryptographer can try it. Anyone how can do basic algebra and may have some programming knowledge can test it.
So I challenge you to download the PDF.
-
-
"Then I thought, 'what kind of pattern.' You know they say, 'One man’s random sequence is another man’s pattern.' And a pattern is in the eye of the beholder." --I quote.
Interesting. Why don't you make it a thread, as @studiot suggested?
A suggestive appetizer for the Riemann hypothesis and Gauss' musings to himself (he was very secretive about some of his more speculative work):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlm1aajH6gY
-
-
I think the situation worked out as best as it possibly could. As far as lives not lost. Any effort to stop the rioters would result in massive casualties. Killing your fellow Americans doesn’t make sense. Trump doesn’t call of the rioters because if he does he has to admit he is in control of them. I think the only reason he makes a statement is to save the rioters lives. More firepower was on the way in my speculation. Whatever was planned didn’t work. And the game becomes more dangerous to prolong the riot. I know it was bad but the dems say it could have been worse. As for future security I don’t know. It is just like gun violence issue with no easy answer. I say we ban Biden and Trump both from the next election.
-
I am for supporting the Ukraine. But I come to the conclusion that they should have avoided war and surrendered to Russia. Yes I know it is more honorable to fight. But I don’t think fighting was in its best interest. They could fight a battle they can win. But more importantly look at the loss of life. At least with surrendering civilian lives are saved. And there would be open peace talks. I don’t like to see them be given ineffective weapons because airplanes and missiles are what they need. From what I hear on the news the can’t attack Russian soil. I want them to prevail but I don’t like to see all these people dying for lack of diplomacy.
-
How accurate is the views number under posts?
Trurl replied to Trurl's topic in Suggestions, Comments and Support
Darn. But that doesn’t explain why some posts have thousands and some have single digits. Wouldn’t it make more sense to track member’s views? Like on profiles? Can’t the forum stats identify a human user? What about trackers? When you view a website they say you have 10 trackers trying to spy on you. I want SFN readers not bots. But if it were accurate it would be useful. Knowing your audience and how many readers have read what you wrote is very important. Not as important as the message. But if you write a message and no one sees it, the message falls short of its goal. -
How accurate is the views number under posts? Not the views to profile. I thought it was accurate because it increased slightly over time. Also the post has replies. I wanted to inspire new cryptographers. I believed it was so simple and would spread fast. Is 11,000 to large? Is it accurate?
-
Once I was enrolled in a master’s class in Adult Education. However one professor failed my curriculum outline. I retook the class and got a B. However, it became too expensive.
So I took my curriculum and taught it here on SFN. I thought, “if I could inspire adults to factor SemiPrimes I would create the ultimate cryptographers.”
So with over 11,000 views, what did you think of the class?
- Show previous comments 1 more
-
-
-
Twitter bot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_bot is automatically answering chat bot pretending or replacing human in repeatable and boring questions and activities. Which has nothing to do with search-engine crawlers.. Totally, totally, different branch of IT..
-
In the book, DBB, the author says the complexity and construction of living creatures cannot happen without design. Like when you see a bridge and know engineers developed it. It is not proof but it is logical. But on a side note, we do have history and archeology but they are limited because we can only look at what’s left over. We can say communication is better today early humans didn’t have written language, but these people were building arches and the Great Wall of China. So by what method do we tell how advanced they are? We thing man advanced became smarter and now we have nuclear power, electricity, and cars but that took thousands of years. Are we smarter than our ancestors? It is more logical to say technology improved with time, but is there a measure of technology advancement? I mean if we graph it mathematically what does the rate of change show? What is putting evolution in motion? DNA and folding proteins? What puts everything together? But what I think is evolving is the mind across a lifetime. I mean both nature vs. nature occurring as one. If connecting proteins is like connecting transistors when does the mind develop. We don’t have Ai yet. When does a evolved organism start to think? These are just my thoughts. I’m sure everyone ponders them sometimes. Things like the ancient Greeks building on what was already known about parallel lines. When you have to hunt and gather food, who thinks about parallel lines? All that goes beyond the scope of the book. But evolution to me is what occurs after the organism is formed.
-
Actually I was referring to the creative designer which you also think is far fetched. But since you bring it up what in science says are ancestors can’t be more advanced? I don’t mean this as an insult. I want you to ponder it. Things like pyramids, construction, knowledge of math. Do we have anyone in the world today that is operating at that level to produce such things?
-
This is going to sound ignorant. I apologize ahead of time. I have limited knowledge of “The Traveling Sales Man” problem. But maybe the problem is drafting. If circle were drawn with the radius of the distance between 2 points would the straight line distance between where the circles intersect be the shortest path? That is easy to say. But I don’t know how to test it. I also haven’t studied current attempts. Is this similar to others attempts?
-
There is a difference between knowing something and teaching it. And not all learning is done through a formal school. But what I understand about you post is that you want to improve learning. Which you can do on a small scale. Become a teacher. But writing curriculum is another job. You can’t start a formal education without employees. It is easy to say no boring assignments or standardized tests, but those are the necessary evil to measure and assess the students. I agree with the others about learning the script. I think some of your problem with current learning is the instructor and not the curriculum. I was taking courses to become certified as an adult editor and the instructor in one class failed me. Which I believed was unjustified. I retook the class and got an A or B. But the point is the instructor makes or breaks a class. You don’t like the “boring assignments.” But it is only boring due to the instructor or students. Learning is fun. It is also a lot of work. You want it to be fun. The fun is a little bit more difficult to see in a formal setting. When I read your post it sounds like a problem with a teacher. You want to become a better teacher. But “going by the script” is the only way. Concentrate on the material and what you would do to fix it. And keep your attitude towards the teacher friendly. They are in control of the classroom. You benefit in no way making them an adversary.
-
I know no one believes me. But this is proof of the Pappy Craylar Conjecture. It is attached in PDF format, because I had to highlight some numbers. Notice how the error of 3 equals 3*7=24 and notice how 11 does the same. The position of the Prime numbers in the first 1000 Prime numbers corresponds to the position on the equation. In other words, 3 is in the second position on the set of numbers and 11 is the fifth position. The test Primes are in the order that the Prime numbers occur. I have highlighted the numbers that represent the equations. I know the equations are difficult to read in standard form, however these are the same equations I have been using. So I challenge you do download the attached PDF. 20220622ProofSFN.pdf
-
Like I said intelligent design is not always related to creationism. I was contrasting my post to the thread “ Who created God” Some theorize that there is no evidence of God today so why did he exist in the past then decide not to show himself today? But we have evidence of intelligent design today. We clone, gene edit, and such. So if creative design exists today what about the past? That is my argument. The author is explaining the biological systems are too complex not to be designed. He uses verbose analogies such as why blood clots and how the eye reacts to light. It’s over done. We know it is complex. On a different point why in science do we always have to have a beginning? Humans have a beginning and end? I realize we can’t picture a universe that always existed, but is that a limitation based on us? And note that science and religion were not always opposites. Early scientists were to explore the mysterious of Gods creation. You could argue scientists have been persecuted by religion. But much of Darwin was used to fuel the holocaust. Even Einstein barely escaped with his life. But my point is we don’t all have the same opinions, but different views doesn’t mean war. Evolution has many logical theories but aren’t we more than that? I mean if you look at cells you think evolution. But what if you look in your life?
-
If you read the book you may like it. I read 4 chapters and it does not promote religion. It is science. There is a difference between intelligent design and God. The book exposes the limitations of Darwinism. But what if an organ was 3D printed or A.I. perfected? Would the android ask, “Who created my creator?”
