/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10023579]

Tomorrow just might be the biggest day in century (yet), /sci/.

[Anonymous No.10023620]

>>10023579
What is it going to change in my life?

[Anonymous No.10023627]

>>10023620
Some math prof with a lot of cred is giving a talk that claims to solve reimann hypothesis tomorrow

[Anonymous No.10023628]

>>10023620
crypto is going down the shitter

[Anonymous No.10023651]

>>10023579
Do you think he used a fancy hamiltonian?
It would be funny if he just walks in and gives a counter-example.

[Anonymous No.10023657]

>>10023579
OP elaborate please

[Anonymous No.10023669]

>>10023651
If he straight up will give counter-example it will be hilarious indeed.

[Anonymous No.10023745]

>>10023628
It wont.
Why would it?

[Anonymous No.10023747]

>>10023745
Look I know people have invested their livelihoods in virtual coins but come on now.

[Anonymous No.10023750]

>>10023747
I suspect that you're a pretending brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10023754]

>>10023750
if you say so bud.

[Anonymous No.10023758]

>>10023628 >>10023745
>crypto is going down the shitter

If the reimann hypothesis is proved
Encryption of Banking transactions,
Internet, Telecom & Crypto currency
can be easily decoded & hacked.

Computer Science fags would have to
create an entirely new alternative
encryption method to protect our banking data.

[Anonymous No.10023761]

>>10023758
And it's not only Crypto currency under risk.
Conventional Electronic Banking is also at stake.

[Anonymous No.10023764]

Sounds like a massive inconvenience for everyone. Why would the prof guy even consider giving this info out.

[Anonymous No.10023788]

>>10023758
Not an expert on the Riemann hypothesis, can you elaborate how this would be?

[Anonymous No.10023801]

>>10023764
Mathematical knowledge is more important than convenience for the unenlightened masses.

[Anonymous No.10023806]

>>10023758
Just assume that it's true and work from there.
Crypto is still here and banks are alive. So fuck off

[Anonymous No.10023813]

>>10023788
He's talking out of his ass. None of that is true.

[Anonymous No.10023814]

>>10023788
The Riemann hypothesis help find out the distribution of prime numbers.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_hypothesis

The modern Encryption method called RSA uses Prime Numbers Theory
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_(cryptosystem)
It uses Large Prime numbers & Factorization of Large Numbers.

RSA encryption is used in ALL banking transactions, e-mails, messaging apps, telecom, crypto currencies & computer security systems.

Riemann hypothesis provide an efficient method for hackers de-encrypt anything that uses RSA encryption.

it could make all banking vulnerable to hackers with access to this math knowledge.

Our luck is that most CS fags are brainlets, but the smartest hackers could become dangerous threats to banking.

Computer Scientists would have to figure out a entirely new encryption system form scratch to make banking secure again.

[Anonymous No.10023816]

>>10023814
>hurr durr

[Anonymous No.10023818]

>>10023816
This

[Anonymous No.10023828]

>>10023814

Hackers couldve just assumed the riemann hypothesis to be true and coded some bs that would work if it was true. The proof doesn't matter to them. Youre either trolling or an idiot.

[Anonymous No.10023842]

ATIYAH ATIYAH ATIYAH!!!!!!

you got this my man!!!

[Anonymous No.10023851]

>>10023828
> trolling
The collapse of modern civilization would be awesome.
Why can't I daydream about it?
Just imagining it make me feel good.

[Anonymous No.10023852]

>>10023814

[Anonymous No.10023860]

>>10023852
CS > sciplebs

[Anonymous No.10023865]

>>10023758
Wrong

If that were true people could assume it was already true and then work off that assumption to achieve the results you mention

[Anonymous No.10023869]

>>10023860
>not getting it

[Anonymous No.10023882]

>>10023865
So? Is it false then?
If it were true people would have broken everything by now. It's either wrong or useless.

[Anonymous No.10023889]

>>10023828
>>10023865
While I agree the result will not have a big impact there is still a possibility the the method used to prove the result could be adapted to solve other problems related to number theory/crypto.

[Anonymous No.10023892]

>>10023579
>hackers

hahahahahahahaahahaha

>hackers

HAHAHAHAHAHA

>hackers

AHA HA HA AHH AAH HA HAH AHH AHAH

>hackers

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
HAHAHAH
AHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHA

this is
hAHAHAHAHA

this isnt
hAHHAHAAH

this isnt

>hackers
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
Hhahaah
hahah
ahahahah
this isnt hehe hahat
this isnt haha

this isnt some fucking mission impossible shit :DD

there are no hackers in this world

there is absolutely no way a computer geek can get a penny from a schekeltstein jew bank by using a computer :DDD

[Anonymous No.10023903]

>>10023892
>there is absolutely no way a computer geek can get a penny from a schekeltstein jew bank by using a computer :DDD
They get pennies from dumb goyim instead.

[Anonymous No.10023907]

>>10023860
*coughs* *uh-hun*

[George Washington Newton No.10023911]

>>10023579
Some guy already solved it over in this thread here: >>10019943

>>10023814
He already solved that too, the exact distribution of the primes is known, as is the nth prime, the number of factors of a number, and the exact factors of a number.

[Anonymous No.10023913]

>>10023911
>the exact distribution of the primes is known
Oy Vey Goyim Knows

[Anonymous No.10023922]

>>10023913
Except it is not true

Logically the only POSSIBLE way to know whether a given number X is prime is to use the Sieve of Erastothenes, which was literally invented 2000 years ago

Here is how it works

1. Have a set of numbers, say N
2. Is 2 a prime? Yes --> remove all numbers divisible by 2.
3. Move on to next number. Is 3 a prime? Yes --> remove all numbers divisible by 3.
4. Move on to next number. Is 5 a prime? Yes --> remove all numbers divisible by 5.
etc etc etc

I repeat. THIS IS THE ONLY LOGICALLY POSSIBLE WAY TO KNOW WHAT NUMBERS ARE PRIMES. ONLY POSSIBLE WAY.

There exists NO function from any input to natural numbers that answers whether a number is prime that ISNT a derivation of Sieve of Erastothenes.

[Anonymous No.10023932]

>>10023922
Why is that the case?

[George Washington Newton No.10023935]

>>10023913
I know right, what's worse is he's fairly certain he can prove it's doable in polynomial time.

>>10023922
>I repeat. THIS IS THE ONLY LOGICALLY POSSIBLE WAY TO KNOW WHAT NUMBERS ARE PRIMES. ONLY POSSIBLE WAY.
Boy, are you gonna be cranky then, lol.

>
There exists NO function from any input to natural numbers that answers whether a number is prime that ISNT a derivation of Sieve of Erastothenes.
This is sort of true, but what you're missing is there are now convenient ways to write the whole sieve at once, and jump ahead, or have 1 function that does it all. You should see some of the crazy primality tests this guy came up with, I mean it's just crazy! I heard he did it mostly only using algebra too ! Some nerve this guy.

[Anonymous No.10023936]

>>10023892
https://www.csoonline.com/article/3276275/data-breach/2-canadian-banks-hacked-90000-customers-data-stolen.html

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/prolific-hacking-group-steals-almost-1-million-from-russian-bank/

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-08/02/c_137363825.htm

[Anonymous No.10023960]

>>10023932
Because in 2000 years no one has invented a better method brainlet. Or, you know, you can give one right now to prove me wrong.

>>10023935
It is not logically possible to write a one function that does "entire sieve of erastothenes at once". What you are doing is composing functions.

>>10023936
>https://www.csoonline.com/article/3276275/data-breach/2-canadian-banks-hacked-90000-customers-data-stolen.html
No mention of method of hacking. Therefore no hacking happened.

>https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/prolific-hacking-group-steals-almost-1-million-from-russian-bank/
>attacked a router
That is called burglary, not hacking.
>http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-08/02/c_137363825.htm
No mention of hacking method, therefore no hacking happened.

[Anonymous No.10023978]

>>10023922
Sieve has exponential complexity, best algorithm for prime checking has polynomial complexity. Check AKS algorithm

[Anonymous No.10024074]

>>10023922
You are grossly uninformed.

[Anonymous No.10024079]

>>10023960
>Because in 2000 years no one has invented a better method brainlet. Or, you know, you can give one right now to prove me wrong.
So is it the case that "Logically the only POSSIBLE way to know whether a given number X is prime is to use the Sieve of Erastothenes"? If so can you explain the logical steps?

[Anonymous No.10024082]

>>10023960
>It is not logically possible to write a one function that does "entire sieve of erastothenes at once". What you are doing is composing functions.

The entire Sieve can be represented or extracted to a single periodic summation.
That sum, which is numfac, contains all the info of the sieve at once. They aren't constructions, that is you don't need to know any set of numbers in advance, like knowing the primes to find the primes. This is especially true since the sum is valid to infinity, and thus can be taken as a whole. If it equals 2 for a given x, it's prime, as long as j >=x.

You can manipulate numfac to give the exact distribution, and further manipulate that to give a recursive sequence for any nth prime. The result is a single variable equation that terminates on the nth prime, and if you use the product polynomial version, you have the entire family of functions calculable in polynomial time.

[Anonymous No.10024087]

>>10024082
wrong pic, that one is similar but without showing input so it's useless meant to post this

[Anonymous No.10024101]

Anyways, it will be interesting to see what he came up with, I know I want to check it out.

Here's one more I've posted before, for fun's sake. Start with this, it's numfac, there are simpler versions of it too, but its a good place to start.