Need post unlocked not to add to but to complement current post; just so viewers know it exists

[Trurl]

I have a request of the Admin. I have a post that is locked. Probably because no one understood what I was trying to do. That is bad communication on my part.

 

The post is: Prime Products just one last tine by Trurl, June 18, 2016 in Mathematics

 

It was locked 5 years ago.

 

 

This post preceded the post Simple yet interesting. I know it has many mistakes and many failed attempts, but it remains the supporting work of my entire efforts. I know no one believes that I solved the Prime factorization problem, but I request this thread to be unlocked not because I wish to add to it. Instead I want to bump it up to be near to the Simple yet interesting post.

 

Why? I need those that see Simple yet interesting to see the earlier work if they care to investigate the math problem further. The truth is it may show more work no one believes, but I intend to use these works on Prime factorization to an academic project. Right or wrong I want to defend my work.

 

I have never defended an academic work. But I have heard even if the work doesn’t prove the hypothesis, the student can explain the thought process behind the math work.

 

But I still believe in this work. I know the Prime factorization problem is supposed to impossible. But we choose to factor semiPrimes not because it is impossible. We choose to factor semiPrimes because it is not supposed to be possible.

 

I do not wish to make anymore posts to Prime Products just one last time. I just want those who view Simple yet interesting who want to research further see the previous work.

[exchemist]

7 hours ago, Trurl said:

I have a request of the Admin. I have a post that is locked. Probably because no one understood what I was trying to do. That is bad communication on my part.

 

The post is: Prime Products just one last tine by Trurl, June 18, 2016 in Mathematics

 

It was locked 5 years ago.

 

 

This post preceded the post Simple yet interesting. I know it has many mistakes and many failed attempts, but it remains the supporting work of my entire efforts. I know no one believes that I solved the Prime factorization problem, but I request this thread to be unlocked not because I wish to add to it. Instead I want to bump it up to be near to the Simple yet interesting post.

 

Why? I need those that see Simple yet interesting to see the earlier work if they care to investigate the math problem further. The truth is it may show more work no one believes, but I intend to use these works on Prime factorization to an academic project. Right or wrong I want to defend my work.

 

I have never defended an academic work. But I have heard even if the work doesn’t prove the hypothesis, the student can explain the thought process behind the math work.

 

But I still believe in this work. I know the Prime factorization problem is supposed to impossible. But we choose to factor semiPrimes not because it is impossible. We choose to factor semiPrimes because it is not supposed to be possible.

 

I do not wish to make anymore posts to Prime Products just one last time. I just want those who view Simple yet interesting who want to research further see the previous work.

Why was it locked, though? Trying to resurrect a discussion the mods have deemed is finished with or worthless won't be looked on favourably.   

[Trurl]

Exchemist, you make a valid point. But my desire to resurrect the post is only so all my work can be seen in the same area. It is not obscene or religious preaching or things of such nature. I posted the locked post to share a math idea. An important part of those posts was to document my work and share what I was working on.

 

There is the fact that I keep trying to factor semiPrimes. For that I look like a fool posting. But I am posting with a seriousness. I know my idea seems impossible or as some would say “trival” because I am not reducing the number of computations compared to standard brute force. But I have shown examples of factoring numbers that are small enough for their factors to be known. My equations will not improve the time it takes to factor small semiPrimes. But what I am working on is a way to lessen the computation of large semiPrimes.

 

I have tried to factor a 2048 bit semiPrime. The answer is incorrect, but this could be because of computer calculation and not my graph. You can find my work on the Simple yet interesting thread in mathematics (page 8).

 

But my goal is not to post to the locked thread. I only want it to be viewed if someone reads the simple yet interesting thread. The project is not just choosing random numbers. It also has many elements other than the test equation. I have researched computer science, cryptography, number theory, and more. I want to use the past thread in an academic project. I also feel that if someone does decide to read Simple yet interesting they may find value in the preceding thread. And maybe some of the information in the original locked thread may prove to have more value than before it was locked.

[swansont]

Thread bumping is something we discourage.  Other people probably feel similarly about some of their own threads, and if they all get bumped, nothing changes - a thread on page 4 is still on page 4.

[Phi for All]

On 7/28/2024 at 7:54 PM, Trurl said:

But my goal is not to post to the locked thread. I only want it to be viewed if someone reads the simple yet interesting thread. The project is not just choosing random numbers. It also has many elements other than the test equation. I have researched computer science, cryptography, number theory, and more. I want to use the past thread in an academic project. I also feel that if someone does decide to read Simple yet interesting they may find value in the preceding thread. And maybe some of the information in the original locked thread may prove to have more value than before it was locked.

You want the thread to be viewed correctly and feel there is information you need to add to achieve that. You admit you get wrong answers with your current process, and want to work to fix that. It's part of an ongoing project and you want the information to be fairly represented. Did I get this right?

This seems more like something you need to work out personally. Unless you think someone specific can help you "talk it out", it doesn't seem like a great discussion topic (I closed that thread because you were the only one posting in it, which isn't really discussion). I would much rather see you figure out your methodology on your own and then start a brand new thread that doesn't have all the past failures attached to it. If there's something there that will teach people in the future, I think this gives you the best opportunity to reach them. Pages of "oops, that's not right" are not conducive to learning for many people.