Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #226 20130722 20:32:41
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsI think that I can provide you with points of polynomials over GF(2^128). I can also choose the leading coefficient. But I think that in order the resuls to be right both of us have to employ the same irreducible polynomial. Last edited by Herc11 (20130722 20:36:12) #227 20130722 20:40:17
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsHi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #228 20130722 21:00:05
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsIn GF(p) all the operations are executed modulo p. #229 20130722 21:32:20
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsDo you have a general type of problem you want to try? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #230 20130722 21:40:53#231 20130722 21:43:06
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomials2^128 = 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #232 20130722 21:46:24
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsIf all the parameteres of the problem are defined correctly I think that there will be no rpoblem. But I remind you that GF elements are not numbers the look like number. I used polynomial basis representation when I worked over GF @^128. #233 20130722 21:48:10
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsWhat does the set look like? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #234 20130722 21:55:02#235 20130722 22:02:08#236 20130722 22:04:39
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsOkay, I will look that over, see you later. I have some chores to do and need to go offline. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #237 20130722 22:05:18#238 20130723 02:02:19
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsThat is going to be a big problem. One of the reasons I am very skeptical that it will always be true. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #239 20130723 02:48:17#240 20130723 02:49:56
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsFirst are we solving for the two points of intersection of 4 quadratics with a given point and leading coefficient of each? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #241 20130723 02:51:49#242 20130723 02:57:52
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsSo the leading coefficients of each of the 4 given polynomials will be ∈ GF. The points given will have x's and y's that are ∈ GF. Now you are requiring the points of intersection of the 4 quadratics to also be ∈ GF? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #243 20130723 03:00:33#244 20130723 03:04:50
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsI am thinking this GF looks like this In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #245 20130723 03:07:00#246 20130723 03:11:37
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomials
All the elements of the set are integers. Modular arithmetic deals with integers. We do not care how mathematica does the solving. We could not understand it anyway. Just a few more things and we can begin to deal with this
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #247 20130723 03:14:18#248 20130723 03:20:23
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsYou mean that when I multiply two elements of this set, I do not first multiply then modulo p the result? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #249 20130723 03:24:10#250 20130723 03:29:58
Re: Define the intersection points of polynomialsMathematica knows all that already. Mathematica spits out x = 2 and x = 5 which corresponds to solving that equation over GF(7). True or false? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. 