6 ms·

I certainly understand the harsh reality of seeing a glimpse of a solution and finding no logical path there. For me, it's factoring large numbers in short tim

I certainly understand the harsh reality of seeing a glimpse of a solution and finding no logical path there. For me, it's factoring large numbers in short times. I've spent 18 years on and off of the problem. Most of that time was coming up with novel ideas and then arriving at the same conclusions as everybody else. I'm too obstinate and "stupid" to know that the problem is practically unsolvable - but fortunately I'm not obsessive enough to throw my life into it. It's basically a hobby I do during my downtime. I like to call it mathematical finger painting, or nature walks through obscure numeric systems. Studying topics, geometries, ancient multiplication methods for fun, and generally scratching under the surface of "why" without knowing how.

Henry_Miller 8y ago
I like your attitude. It feels like the appropriate way to explore in the mysteries of Nature. I've only spent maybe dozens of hours thinking about prime numbers myself over the years and I just can't shake the feeling that the only way to do what you're trying is with fantastical computers containing practically infinite bits and run all the calculations in parallel. But that doesn't detract, I think, from the fun of trying to think of tricks to pass the time.
teekert 8y ago
I feel this way abut getting rich with some super smart idea that is just, just beyond the grasp of my intellect... This may well stay true for the rest of my life of course... More down to earth though, I'm a biologist and whenever I get this feeling related to work, scientifically I have learned to trust it and keep at it, it usually does mean there is something of value in my ideas.
hexscrews 8y ago
I'd say that even if your answer is completely wrong, at least you can document WHY it was wrong. And maybe someone can open up a new vein of inquiry that branches off yours. It reminds me of a sci-fi story where people who decided that they were tired of being emulated retired to a virtual mine where they try to discover new mathematical proofs. They didn't have to do it, since it served no real purpose. But it opened up new avenues of knowledge.
- felipemnoa 8y ago
  >>It reminds me of a sci-fi story Could you mention the the name?
  - jonnybgood 8y ago
    Sounds like Diaspora by Greg Egan. If it’s not, Diaspora also has a virtual mine of mathematical proofs that is mined by the citizens, which are virtual “human” entities living in a simulated world.
wesammikhail 8y ago
I registered an account just to reply to your comment. After reading the article in question, I was thinking about my own experience. I too have been working on prime factorization for the past 6 years in the same fashion that you have and what you just wrote here describe perfectly how I feel about my progress and journey. Which makes me wonder... How many people out there are like us, working on the same problem while feeling the same way? It's like the problem is laughing at you. Baiting you back in with its extreme simplicity. It truly is a mesmerizing problem that you can't help but feel is solvable if only one single Eureka moment is reached. Boy do I want this one solved...
- skriticos2 8y ago
  Not the same problem, but I have been on and off thinking about infinite/recursive compression and compression of random data. Finding patterns in numbers can be very compelling.
  - Retric 8y ago
    I have gone down such rabbit holes before. However, it's easy to demonstrate you can't compress arbitrary unbiased random data without going lossy. For every possible input 0 to X you need to map to a different 'compressed' format. So, if you want to handle every possibility then some of your compressed versions need to be as long if not longer than the original version. That's not a problem if their is some bias in how your generating the data. Just map the more common versions to shorter encoding and you get a useful compression even if sometimes it makes things worse on average their is an improvement. But, with unbiased random data you can't chose which subset is more likely because every version is equally likely. Which is why it does not work.
    - odonnellryan 8y ago
      To be said another way: certainly you can figure out a compression algorithm for any one set of data by being clever and taking your time, but that algorithm will not apply to a general case and would be worthless. If you go about finding patterns in a random string it is unlikely that another random string will have those patterns.

Henry_Miller 8y ago

I like your attitude. It feels like the appropriate way to explore in the mysteries of Nature. I've only spent maybe dozens of hours thinking about prime numbers myself over the years and I just can't shake the feeling that the only way to do what you're trying is with fantastical computers containing practically infinite bits and run all the calculations in parallel. But that doesn't detract, I think, from the fun of trying to think of tricks to pass the time.

teekert 8y ago

I feel this way abut getting rich with some super smart idea that is just, just beyond the grasp of my intellect... This may well stay true for the rest of my life of course... More down to earth though, I'm a biologist and whenever I get this feeling related to work, scientifically I have learned to trust it and keep at it, it usually does mean there is something of value in my ideas.

hexscrews 8y ago

I'd say that even if your answer is completely wrong, at least you can document WHY it was wrong. And maybe someone can open up a new vein of inquiry that branches off yours. It reminds me of a sci-fi story where people who decided that they were tired of being emulated retired to a virtual mine where they try to discover new mathematical proofs. They didn't have to do it, since it served no real purpose. But it opened up new avenues of knowledge.

felipemnoa 8y ago
>>It reminds me of a sci-fi story Could you mention the the name?
- jonnybgood 8y ago
  Sounds like Diaspora by Greg Egan. If it’s not, Diaspora also has a virtual mine of mathematical proofs that is mined by the citizens, which are virtual “human” entities living in a simulated world.

wesammikhail 8y ago

I registered an account just to reply to your comment. After reading the article in question, I was thinking about my own experience. I too have been working on prime factorization for the past 6 years in the same fashion that you have and what you just wrote here describe perfectly how I feel about my progress and journey. Which makes me wonder... How many people out there are like us, working on the same problem while feeling the same way? It's like the problem is laughing at you. Baiting you back in with its extreme simplicity. It truly is a mesmerizing problem that you can't help but feel is solvable if only one single Eureka moment is reached. Boy do I want this one solved...

skriticos2 8y ago
Not the same problem, but I have been on and off thinking about infinite/recursive compression and compression of random data. Finding patterns in numbers can be very compelling.
- Retric 8y ago
  I have gone down such rabbit holes before. However, it's easy to demonstrate you can't compress arbitrary unbiased random data without going lossy. For every possible input 0 to X you need to map to a different 'compressed' format. So, if you want to handle every possibility then some of your compressed versions need to be as long if not longer than the original version. That's not a problem if their is some bias in how your generating the data. Just map the more common versions to shorter encoding and you get a useful compression even if sometimes it makes things worse on average their is an improvement. But, with unbiased random data you can't chose which subset is more likely because every version is equally likely. Which is why it does not work.
  - odonnellryan 8y ago
    To be said another way: certainly you can figure out a compression algorithm for any one set of data by being clever and taking your time, but that algorithm will not apply to a general case and would be worthless. If you go about finding patterns in a random string it is unlikely that another random string will have those patterns.