P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution.
From: Alexander T. Hamming (ath77_at_aol.com)
Date: 05/31/04
- Next message: |-|erc: "Re: limitation to the halting proof"
- Previous message: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Hardware/Software Dichotomy and Platonism (Re: expectations being satisfied)"
- Next in thread: Denis Feldmann: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Reply: Denis Feldmann: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Reply: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 31 May 2004 00:02:19 -0700
"Lance Lamboy" <lance.lamboy@lamboy.nospam.com> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.05.30.17.48.46.912206@lamboy.nospam.com>...
> On Sun, 30 May 2004 10:36:59 -0700, Marius Ionescu wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > 1WayFx Model demonstrates the existence of a class of problems in NP?P,
> > and therefore P is strictly included in NP.
>
> That P is in NP is trivially correct.
He said "strictly", genius.
>
>
> > Consequently, the associated cryptosystem is an unbreakable security
> > solution, which solves today's major implementation issues, including
> > difficulty of deployment, data/message integrity, security exposure, and
> > performance.
>
> This is wrong. The associated cryptosystem is breakable in polynomial
> time. Even if the 1WayFx problem (which I am not familiar with) was
> exponential, then it would still be a stretch to say that the associated
> cryptosystem was unbreakable. It would be more accurate to say that it
> was incredibly difficult to break.
No sh*t Sherlock, you've said absolutely nothing. I'm sick and tired
of seeing on usenet critiques of papers without reading them. I've
been looking at usenet comp.theory for about 3 weeks now and have
found that people who post aren't so bright. Even the PhD's that post
are pretty stupid.
Anyone read his paper have intelligent comments? I thought the paper
is reasonable (at a first glance) and worth looking at further.
Cheers,
ATH
>
>
> > Please visit my Web site for the model fundamentals, presentation and
> > demo at 1wayfx.com.
> >
> > I would welcome an opportunity to discuss this solution with you.
> >
> > Thank you for your consideration.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Marius Ionescu
>
>
> Lance Lamboy
- Next message: |-|erc: "Re: limitation to the halting proof"
- Previous message: Neil W Rickert: "Re: Hardware/Software Dichotomy and Platonism (Re: expectations being satisfied)"
- Next in thread: Denis Feldmann: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Reply: Denis Feldmann: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Reply: stephen_at_nomail.com: "Re: P vs. NP Problem; 1WayFx Model a possible solution."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|