MHB Factorisation Related Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter PeterJ1
  • Start date Start date
PeterJ1
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
A slightly odd layman's question about factoring large numbers and comparing two calculations.

Call N a number with 1050 digits.

1) Factorise N
2) Multiply the primes sequentially from 2 onwards until the product is as close as possible to N.

Would calculation 2 be significantly easier computationally than calculation 1?

How many digits would a number has to have before factorisation becomes a problem for our current methods?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Thanks Greg.

"... to factor a 232-digit number (RSA-768) utilizing hundreds of machines took two years and the researchers estimated that a 1024-bit RSA modulus would take about a thousand times as long.[1]"

This helps with the second question but not the first, which is my main question.
 
Doh! On reflection the answer to the second question is obvious. Consider it answered.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top