Re: Factoring method with quad res result?

jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> Gib Bogle wrote:
> > jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> >
> > > Justin wrote:
> > >
> > >>In sci.math jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >>: This quadratic residue result is just freaking incredible.
> > >>
> > >>If you think that's incredible, you should have taken my Introduction to
> > >>Number Theory class this semester. I assigned lots of homeworks at about
> > >>the same incredibility level!
> > >>
> > >>Justin
> > >
> > >
> > > Really? You assign potential solutions to the factoring problem as
> > > homework assignments?
> > >
> > > Wow! Hard class!!!
> >
> > There is a lot of hard stuff in university maths courses. Some of it
> > goes well beyond quadratics.
>
> I was joking.
>
> No one assigns the factoring problem as a homework assignment.
>
> I don't care how hard the university is.
>
> This result of mine is being attacked by people already trying to call
> it trivial.
>
> So I made the point that there is nothing trivial about a result that
> immediately connects to the factoring problem.
>
> Compared to my research, nothing much that anyone in the world is doing
> amounts to much of anything, no matter what the school.
>
> No one can solve hard problems this easily, or come up with multiple
> solutions, like this being my second idea that I am increasingly
> confident solves the factoring problem.
>
> If I am right, I solved the factoring problem once already, with
> something a little too complicated for just about everyone in the
> world, but came back later and found something simpler for a second
> solution to what mathematicians have convinced inverstors is one of the
> hardest problems out there.
>
> No other mathematical research out there is even close in comparison.
>
> You people may as well be toddlers when it comes to mathematics, in
> comparison.
>
>
> James Harris

lol! is this really James? It just seems...you know, too mutch JH to
really be him. Then again, i wouldn't be completely surprised...
Received on Mon May 1 02:06:29 2006