Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Main page: Help searching Wikipedia
How can I get my question answered?
- Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
- Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
- Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
- Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
- Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
- Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.
How do I answer a question?
Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines
- The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
November 19
[edit]November 20
[edit]Sequences: Is there a name for a sequence, all of whose members are different from each other?
[edit]2A06:C701:7455:4600:C907:E8C0:F042:F072 (talk) 09:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
- A term used in the literature: injective sequence.[1] --Lambiam 13:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
November 21
[edit]Is it possible to adapt Nigel’s Smart algorithm for establshing an isomorphism when the curve is only partially anomalous ?
[edit]An anomalous elliptic curve is a curve for which . But in my case, the curve has order j×q and the underlying field has order i×q. In the situation I’m thinking about, I do have 2 points such as both G∈q and P∈q subgroup and where P=s×G.
So since the scalar lies in a common part of the additive group from both the curve along it’s underlying base field, is it possible to transfer the discrete logarithm to the underlying finite field ? Or does anomalous curves requires the whole embedding field’s order to match the one of the curve even if the discrete logarithm solution lies into a common smaller group ?
If yes, how to adapt the Nigel’s smart algorithm used for solving the discrete logarithm inside anomalous curves ? The aim is to etablish an isomorphism between the common subgroup generated by E and 82.66.26.199 (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
November 22
[edit]Fourteen-segment display (alphanumeric display) can be used in base 36 (the largest case-insensitive alphanumeric numeral system using ASCII characters), thus we can use fourteen-segment display to define dihedral primes in base 36 (with A=10, B=11, C=12, …, Z=35), just like seven-segment display to define dihedral primes in base 10. If we use fourteen-segment display to define dihedral primes in base 36 (with A=10, B=11, C=12, …, Z=35), which numbers will be the dihedral primes in base 36 with <= 6 digits? 218.187.66.155 (talk) 19:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- It depends on how you encode each symbol on a fourteen-segment display (in particular, the number 0 and the letter O will need to be distinguished). If we go by File:Arabic number on a 14 segement display.gif and File:Latin alphabet on a 14 segement display.gif, then there are ten valid inversions, which are as follows: 0 <-> 0, 2 <-> 5, 8 <-> 8, H (17) <-> H, I (18) <-> I, M (22) <-> W (32), N (23) <-> N, O (24) <-> O, X (33) <-> X, and Z (35) <-> Z. Of these, only 5, H, N, and Z are coprime to 36, so any dihedral prime must necessarily end with one of these. Duckmather (talk) 04:02, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- We can use an encoding that the inversions not only include the ones which you listed, but also include 1 <-> 1, 3 <-> E (14), 6 <-> 9, 7 <-> L (21), and S (28) <-> S, if so, then which numbers will be the dihedral primes in base 36 with <= 6 digits? (Also, why 2 <-> 5? They are not rotated 180 degrees) 210.243.207.143 (talk) 20:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- We can also consider “horizontal surface” “vertical surface”, and “rotate 180 degrees”, separately, and consider normal glyphs and fourteen-segment display glyphs separately (see Strobogrammatic number, we can also find the strobogrammatic numbers (as well as the strobogrammatic primes) in base 36):
- Horizontal surface:
- 0 <-> 0 (only normal glyph)
- 1 <-> 1
- 2 <-> 5 (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 3 <-> 3
- 7 <-> J (19) (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 8 <-> 8
- B (11) <-> B
- C (12) <-> C
- D (13) <-> D
- E (14) <-> E
- H (17) <-> H
- I (18) <-> I
- K (20) <-> K
- M (22) <-> W (32)
- O (24) <-> O
- X (33) <-> X
- Vertical surface:
- 0 <-> 0 (only normal glyph)
- 1 <-> 1
- 2 <-> 5 (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 3 <-> E (14) (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 8 <-> 8
- A (10) <-> A
- H (17) <-> H
- I (18) <-> I
- J (19) <-> L (21) (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- M (22) <-> M
- O (24) <-> O
- T (29) <-> T
- U (30) <-> U
- V (31) <-> V (only normal glyph)
- W (32) <-> W
- X (33) <-> X
- Y (34) <-> Y
- Rotate 180 degrees:
- 0 <-> 0
- 1 <-> 1
- 2 <-> 2 (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 3 <-> E (14) (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 5 <-> 5 (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 6 <-> 9
- 7 <-> L (21) (only fourteen-segment display glyph)
- 8 <-> 8
- H (17) <-> H
- I (18) <-> I
- M (22) <-> W (32)
- N (23) <-> N
- O (24) <-> O
- S (28) <-> S (only normal glyph)
- X (33) <-> X
- Z (35) <-> Z 218.187.66.221 (talk) 18:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
November 23
[edit]radial distance between a circle and another enclosing circle
[edit]On an x-y plane, draw a circle, radius r1 centered on the origin, 0,0. Draw a second circle centered on some offset value -x, y = 0, radius r2 which greater than r1+x so that the second circle completely encloses the first and does not touch it. Draw a line at angle a beginning at the origin and crossing both circles. How do I calculate the distance along this line between the two circles? ```` Dionne Court (talk) 06:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Given:
- inner circle: centre at radius equation
- outer circle: centre at radius equation
- line through origin at angle parametric equation
- The line crosses the inner circle at both obviously at distance from the origin.
- To find its crossings with the outer circle, we substitute the rhs of the line's equation for into the equation of the outer circle, giving We need to solve this for the unknown . This is a quadratic equation; call its roots and The corresponding points are at distances and from the origin.
- The crossing distances are then and
- If you use and this will work for any second circle, also of it intersects the origin-centred circle or is wholly inside, provided the quadratic equation has real-valued roots. --Lambiam 08:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
November 27
[edit]How much did UPS pay in workers comp claims for heat-related incidents last year? On the flip side, how much would it cost to air-condition their package vans and warehouses?
[edit]Did they also pay hazard bonuses for working in the heat?
Is it cheaper for UPS to just air condition their warehouses and package vans?
After paying the initial installation fees for the new HVAC systems, how much will it cost for UPS to run air conditioning and maintain their HVAC systems for one year (at least only when the weather is hot?)
And how much did they pay out in heat-related workers comp claims for one year?
How well will UPS come out ahead from simply air conditioning all places and vehicles that need air conditioned? --2600:8803:1D13:7100:BD6D:70D0:30AC:B227 (talk) 01:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a mathematics question. We don’t answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate. Dolphin (t) 04:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
The largest prime factor found by trial division
[edit]The largest prime factor found by Lenstra elliptic-curve factorization is 16559819925107279963180573885975861071762981898238616724384425798932514688349020287 of 7337+1 (see [2]), and the largest prime factor found by Pollard's p − 1 algorithm is 672038771836751227845696565342450315062141551559473564642434674541 of 960119-1 (see [3]), and the largest prime factor found by Williams's p + 1 algorithm is 725516237739635905037132916171116034279215026146021770250523 of the Lucas number L2366 (see [4]), but what is the largest prime factor found by trial division? (For general numbers, not for special numbers, e.g. 7*220267500+1 divides the number 12220267499+1 found by trial division, but 12220267499+1 is a special number since all of its prime factors are == 1 mod 220267500, thus the trial division only need to test the primes == 1 mod 220267500, but for general numbers such as 3*2100+1, all primes may be factors) 61.229.100.16 (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have an answer, and Mersenne primes have properties that reduce the number of primes that need to be searched, meaning that it doesn't technically need full trial division, but I would nevertheless like to raise two famous examples which I'm fairly sure were done through manual checking:
- In 1903, Frank Nelson Cole showed that is composite by going up to a blackboard and demonstrating by hand that it equals . It took him "three years of Sundays" to do so, and I'm fairly sure he would have done it manually.
- In 1951, Aimé Ferrier showed that is prime through use of a desk calculator, and I imagine a lot of handiwork.
- GalacticShoe (talk) 02:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
November 29
[edit]In finite fields of large characteristics, what does prevent shrinking the modulus field size down to their larger order in order to solve discrete logarithms ?
[edit]In the recent years, several algorithms were proposed to leverage elliptic curves for lowering the degree of a finite field and thus allow to solve discrete logairthm modulo their largest suborder/subgroup instead of the original far larger finite field. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10327 in part conduct a survey about those methods. Espescially since I don’t see why a large chararcteristics would be prone to fall in the trap being listed by the paper.
I do get the whole small characteristics alogrithms complexity makes those papers unsuitable for computing discrete logarithms in finite fields of large charateristics, but what does prevent applying the descent/degree shrinking part to large characteristics ? 2A01:E0A:401:A7C0:68A8:D520:8456:B895 (talk) 11:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- Try web search for Lim-Lee small subgroup attack. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:C426 (talk) 23:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- First the paper apply when no other information is known beside the 2 finite field’s elements and then this is different from https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10327. While Pollard rho can remain more efficient, if the subgroup is too large, then it’s still not enough fast. I’m talking about shrinking modulus size directly. 2A01:E0A:401:A7C0:69D2:554C:93AF:D6AC (talk) 15:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
The problem with descent methods like the one described in large characteristic is that the complexity is . This is explained more clearly in [5]. If the characteristic is small, then the problem is O(k) bits, and the complexity id pseudo-polynomial in the number of bits. If the characteristic is large, then the compexity is which is exponential in the number of bits of q. Tito Omburo (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
November 30
[edit]Linear differential function
[edit]Differential 102.213.69.166 (talk) 04:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? ‹hamster717🐉› (discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠) 14:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)