Jump to content

Talk:Euler's factorization method: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)
 
(17 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
{{WikiProject Mathematics|importance=}}
}}

==June 2015==
I have my own variation on the theme, which I shall demonstrate using the same numbers as in the worked example:
I have my own variation on the theme, which I shall demonstrate using the same numbers as in the worked example:


Line 37: Line 42:
== Another Euler Factorisation method mentioned in Dickson's History of Numbers ==
== Another Euler Factorisation method mentioned in Dickson's History of Numbers ==


===Euler Can Factor From Two Equations Of a^2+D*y^2, not just from x^2+y^2===
'''Euler Can Factor From Two Equations Of a^2+D*y^2, not just from x^2+y^2'''


Euler seems to have another factoring method, mentioned in p362 of vol 1 of Dickson's "History of Numbers"<ref>
Euler seems to have another factoring method, mentioned in p362 of vol 1 of Dickson's "History of Numbers"<ref>
"History of the Theory of Numbers" Volume 1 by Leonard Eugene Dickson, p362
"History of the Theory of Numbers" Volume 1 by Leonard Eugene Dickson, p362, Chelsea Publishing 1952
<!-- url=https://ia800209.us.archive.org/12/items/historyoftheoryo01dick/historyoftheoryo01dick.pdf -->
<!-- url=https://ia800209.us.archive.org/12/items/historyoftheoryo01dick/historyoftheoryo01dick.pdf -->
[https://archive.org/stream/historyoftheoryo01dick#page/362/mode/2up read online]
[https://archive.org/stream/historyoftheoryo01dick#page/362/mode/2up read online]
Line 46: Line 51:


<blockquote>
<blockquote>
:Euler<ref>IBID p 11. Comm Arith,2, 220-242, for <math>\lambda=2</math> Opera posthuma, I, 1862, 159</ref> noted that <math>N=a^{2}+\lambda*b^{2}=x^{2}+\lambda*y^{2}</math> imply
:Euler<ref>Nova acta Academiae scientiarum imperialis petropolitanae., 14, 1797-8 (1778).3 p 11. Comm Arith,2, 220-242, for <math>\lambda=2</math> Opera posthuma, I, 1862, 159</ref> noted that <math>N=a^{2}+\lambda*b^{2}=x^{2}+\lambda*y^{2}</math> imply
:<math>N=(1/2)*(\lambda*m^{2}+n^{2})*(\lambda*p^{2}+q^{2})</math>, <math>a\pm x=\lambda*m*p, n*q</math>, <math>y\pm b=m*q, n*p</math>
:<math>N=(1/4)*(\lambda*m^{2}+n^{2})*(\lambda*p^{2}+q^{2})</math>, <math>a\pm x=\lambda*m*p, n*q</math>, <math>y\pm b=m*q, n*p</math>


:so that <math>\lambda*p^{2}+q^{2}</math>, or its half or quarter, is a factor of N.
:so that <math>\lambda*p^{2}+q^{2}</math>, or its half or quarter, is a factor of N.
Line 54: Line 59:
Can someone verify whether this is true or not. And whether this math should get into the article.
Can someone verify whether this is true or not. And whether this math should get into the article.


It seems that finding two sets of <math>a^{2}+\lambda*b^{2}=P*Q</math> is easier than finding two sets of
It seems that finding one <math>a^{2}+\lambda*b^{2}=P*Q</math> is easy but finding two with the same lambda is difficult.
<math>x^{2}+y^{2}=P*Q</math>. We shall see from an example that this math seems to be correct, at least for some of these square pairs.


The following equation shows this to work:
Dropping into Mathematica for an example:


<pre>
<pre>
Solve[
Solve[a^2 + 5 b^2 == 89 29, {a, b}, Integers]
a^2 + 5 b^2 == 8467 39343 && a > 0 && b > 0, {a, b}, Integers]


{{a -> -49, b -> -6}, {a -> -49, b -> 6}, {a -> -31,
{{a -> 16541, b -> 3450}, {a -> 17776, b -> 1851}}
b -> -18}, {a -> -31, b -> 18}, {a -> 31, b -> -18},


aa =
{a -> 31, b -> 18}, {a -> 49, b -> 6}}
Solve[16541 - 17776 == 5 m p && 3450 + 1851 == m q &&
3450 - 1851 == n p, {m, n, p, q}, Integers]


{{m -> -19, n -> 123, p -> 13, q -> -279}, {m -> 19,
n -> -123, p -> -13, q -> 279}}
now one of the factors is seen, 39343


(1/2) (5 p^2 + q^2) /. aa
aa = Solve[31 + 49 == 5 m p, {m, p}, Integers]


{39343, 39343}
{{m -> -16, p -> -1}, {m -> -8, p -> -2}, {m -> -4,
</pre>
p -> -4}, {m -> -2, p -> -8}, {m -> -1, p -> -16}, {m -> 1,
p -> 16}, {m -> 2, p -> 8}, {m -> 4, p -> 4}, {m -> 8,
p -> 2}, {m -> 16, p -> 1}}


This example shows the factoring algorithm works on 3 mod 4 semiprimes, and is thus more general
bb = Solve[31 + 49 == n q, {n, q}, Integers]
than the more well known Euler factoring algorithm.


James McKee has a paper
{{n -> -80, q -> -1}, {n -> -40, q -> -2}, {n -> -20,
<ref>
q -> -4}, {n -> -16, q -> -5}, {n -> -10, q -> -8}, {n -> -8,
"Turning Euler's Factoring Method into a factoring algorithm" by James McKee. Bulletin. London
q -> -10}, {n -> -5, q -> -16}, {n -> -4, q -> -20}, {n -> -2,
Math Society 28(1996)351-355 url=https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6d7d/9e973cc9d228e7b62e77917dc53ec053d98a.pdf
q -> -40}, {n -> -1, q -> -80}, {n -> 1, q -> 80}, {n -> 2,
</ref>
q -> 40}, {n -> 4, q -> 20}, {n -> 5, q -> 16}, {n -> 8,
on this type of factorization and claims it is <math>\Omega(\sqrt[3]{N})</math>.
q -> 10}, {n -> 10, q -> 8}, {n -> 16, q -> 5}, {n -> 20,
q -> 4}, {n -> 40, q -> 2}, {n -> 80, q -> 1}}


Another source that extends Euler's <math>x^{2}+D*y^{2}==p*q</math> work to <math>F*x^{2}+D*y^{2}==p*q</math>
Finally we get a correct answer from one of the possiblities
is at url <ref>"The Completion of Euler's factoring formula", Blecksmith, Brillhart, Decaro url=https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.rmjm/1375361973, Rocky Mountain J. Math.

Volume 43, Number 3 (2013), 755-762.</ref>. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Endo999|Endo999]] ([[User talk:Endo999#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Endo999|contribs]]) 01:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)</span>
(m^2 + n^2) /. aa /. bb
{{talkref}}

{{6656, 6464, 6416, 6404, 6401, 6401, 6404, 6416, 6464, 6656}, {1856,
1664, 1616, 1604, 1601, 1601, 1604, 1616, 1664, 1856}, {656, 464,
416, 404, 401, 401, 404, 416, 464, 656}, {512, 320, 272, 260, 257,
257, 260, 272, 320, 512}, {356, 164, 116, 104, 101, 101, 104, 116,
164, 356}, {320, 128, 80, 68, 65, 65, 68, 80, 128, 320},

{281, 89, 41, 29, 26, 26, 29, 41, 89, 281},

{272, 80, 32, 20, 17, 17, 20, 32,
80, 272}, {260, 68, 20, 8, 5, 5, 8, 20, 68, 260}, {257, 65, 17, 5,
2, 2, 5, 17, 65, 257}, {257, 65, 17, 5, 2, 2, 5, 17, 65, 257}, {260,
68, 20, 8, 5, 5, 8, 20, 68, 260}, {272, 80, 32, 20, 17, 17, 20, 32,
80, 272}, {281, 89, 41, 29, 26, 26, 29, 41, 89, 281}, {320, 128,
80, 68, 65, 65, 68, 80, 128, 320}, {356, 164, 116, 104, 101, 101,
104, 116, 164, 356}, {512, 320, 272, 260, 257, 257, 260, 272, 320,
512}, {656, 464, 416, 404, 401, 401, 404, 416, 464, 656}, {1856,
1664, 1616, 1604, 1601, 1601, 1604, 1616, 1664, 1856}, {6656, 6464,
6416, 6404, 6401, 6401, 6404, 6416, 6464, 6656}}

</pre>

Latest revision as of 10:18, 31 January 2024

June 2015

[edit]

I have my own variation on the theme, which I shall demonstrate using the same numbers as in the worked example:

1000009 = 1000^2 + 3^2 = 972^2 + 235^2.

Pair off the squared numbers, odd with odd and even with even: {1000,972} and {235,3}.

Take one pair and put their half-sum and half-difference along the diagonal of a 2x2 square:

986 ===
===  14

Fill in the remaining spaces with the half-sum and half-difference from the other pair:

986  119
116   14

Now calculate the ratios reading across and down:

986/119 = 116/14 = 58/7
986/116 = 119/14 = 17/2
986  119      17
116   14       2
58    7
And the factors are:
58^2 + 7^2 = 3413
17^2 + 2^2 =  293

86.4.253.180 (talk) 00:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 86.4.253.180 (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 86.4.253.180 (talk) 00:24, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"which apparently was previously thought to be prime even though it is not a pseudoprime by any major primality test." This sentence doesn't make sense. Typo maybe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.46.174.233 (talk) 03:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't this make any sense? Pieater3.14159265 (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another Euler Factorisation method mentioned in Dickson's History of Numbers

[edit]

Euler Can Factor From Two Equations Of a^2+D*y^2, not just from x^2+y^2

Euler seems to have another factoring method, mentioned in p362 of vol 1 of Dickson's "History of Numbers"[1]:

Euler[2] noted that imply
, ,
so that , or its half or quarter, is a factor of N.

Can someone verify whether this is true or not. And whether this math should get into the article.

It seems that finding one is easy but finding two with the same lambda is difficult.

The following equation shows this to work:

Solve[
 a^2 + 5 b^2 == 8467 39343 && a > 0 && b > 0, {a, b}, Integers]

{{a -> 16541, b -> 3450}, {a -> 17776, b -> 1851}}

aa = 
 Solve[16541 - 17776 == 5 m p && 3450 + 1851 == m q && 
   3450 - 1851 == n p, {m, n, p, q}, Integers]

 {{m -> -19, n -> 123, p -> 13, q -> -279}, {m -> 19, 
  n -> -123, p -> -13, q -> 279}}
now one of the factors is seen, 39343

(1/2) (5 p^2 + q^2) /. aa

{39343, 39343}

This example shows the factoring algorithm works on 3 mod 4 semiprimes, and is thus more general than the more well known Euler factoring algorithm.

James McKee has a paper [3] on this type of factorization and claims it is .

Another source that extends Euler's work to is at url [4]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endo999 (talkcontribs) 01:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "History of the Theory of Numbers" Volume 1 by Leonard Eugene Dickson, p362, Chelsea Publishing 1952 read online
  2. ^ Nova acta Academiae scientiarum imperialis petropolitanae., 14, 1797-8 (1778).3 p 11. Comm Arith,2, 220-242, for Opera posthuma, I, 1862, 159
  3. ^ "Turning Euler's Factoring Method into a factoring algorithm" by James McKee. Bulletin. London Math Society 28(1996)351-355 url=https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6d7d/9e973cc9d228e7b62e77917dc53ec053d98a.pdf
  4. ^ "The Completion of Euler's factoring formula", Blecksmith, Brillhart, Decaro url=https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.rmjm/1375361973, Rocky Mountain J. Math. Volume 43, Number 3 (2013), 755-762.