Author Topic: Prime phreaking  (Read 3978 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Prime phreaking
« on: February 09, 2014, 11:40:04 AM »
The following belongs under this topic due to its applications with contemporary encryption technology and data security.

I have a strange sort of head space. For example, I suck (I really, really suck) at arithmetic but am an avid reader of abstract mathematics; I seem to have a grasp for this stuff which I didn't discover until my 40's. My favorite topics are number theory, topology, set theory (particularly Cantor's Continuum Hypothesis and transfinite numbers), anything to do with Riemann's Non-Euclidean Geometry and the distribution of primes on the number line (aka The Zeta Function). On the last, I'd like to share this stuff with you. May it bring you perplexity and joy!

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2010/nov/03/million-dollars-maths-riemann-hypothesis
The security encryptions which are used in today's world are derived from the above. It might be catastrophic if the Riemann Hypothesis actually gets proven. Some say yes, some say no.

And the image that the primes up to 10,000 project:


http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeSpiral.html
Does it remind you of anything? (I realize the association is merely an artifact of the finite count--in reality the spiral should go on to infinity.)
« Last Edit: February 10, 2014, 06:27:36 AM by tarascon »
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline smokester

  • Administrator
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 14705
  • Gender: Male
  • Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo!
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2014, 04:04:29 PM »
Okay. If just reading your post gave me a headache, golly knows what the math would do.
Don't put off until tomorrow, what you can put off until the day after.

There is an exception to every rule, apart from this one.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2014, 05:41:05 PM »
Okay. If just reading your post gave me a headache, golly knows what the math would do.

 ;D
This thread isn't about maths--it's about curiosity, imagination, and the ideas which have led us to this point in history. We all post here via our computers and the zeta function, for instance, has helped keep us secure by making brute force cracking more difficult.
I have an intuitive grasp for some of this material and I'm not a logical thinker, per se. When I read the material, I avoid most of the equations and read the text as if it were science fiction... a science fiction based on real stuff.  ;D

Spoiler (hover to show)

Which reminds me... Euler's formula for Polyhedra (F - E + V = 2 *) states that all solid geometrical objects are not unique but are related to the number 2--a prime number. I find that fascinating. This equation is the root source of all modern topography which is not only about shapes and knots but is used in DNA research as well as astronomy.

* where:
F means "face"
E means "edge"
V means "vertices"
For example, a cube has 6 faces, 12 edges, and 8 vertices. 6 - 12 + 8 = 2. The exact count for these change dependent on the object (like a dodecahedron [12 - 30 + 20 = 2], etc) but the tally always comes to the number 2.
This fact is deeply weird.

And, speaking of computers, let me offer this:



Sorry for the book-length post. I'll knock it off now before I headache you folks to death.  ;) Also, I'm not trying to show off... just wanted to share this with whomever might wonder at it the way I do.
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline smokester

  • Administrator
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 14705
  • Gender: Male
  • Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo!
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2014, 03:00:26 AM »
I deal in faces, edges and vertices with the CGI I dabble with.  I am not sure what purpose that mathematical equation has.  It doesn't particularly help with anything - like poly count - it just seems quirky like the 9 times table.

Interesting nonetheless and I suppose it is an example of "seeing math" rather than being bogged down by its complexity.
Don't put off until tomorrow, what you can put off until the day after.

There is an exception to every rule, apart from this one.

Offline 8ullfrog

  • Human
  • *****
  • Posts: 1990
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2014, 05:22:40 AM »
I can't math. Disability. I actually contacted and worked with the American Derpartment of Rehabilitation on this issue.

Mentally? I'm on the same level as someone who needs a wheelchair. Bleak level? They cut me loose. I did months on their crappy computers in various high schools, but they decided I can't math.

They actually said I should be a handyman's assistant. Like I'm that bless'ed devoid of meaning. Can't paint houses on my own, gotta be that guy's madam.

But Phreaking? Blows my mind. And I'm not alone. One of the reasons they locked mitnick in a hole is because a judge thought he could whistle into a phone and launch nukes.


Or at least, that's what the internet says.

I'd bless'ed kill if I could hack like in the movies. Twenty lines in a green and black interface and you're Billg.


just one little time change so a draft board in 1968 turns down the bribe to accept "bone spurs" and we are home-free.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2014, 06:40:31 AM »
I'm actually reading Mitnick's memoir at the moment. Ghost in the Wires.
The book is very self-important and deservedly so. He's impressive. I did some phone phreaking back in the 70's. Minor stuff.
And, yeah, he was accused of that whistle into the phone and send the nukes flying thing... a Captain Crunch whistle, I suppose. LOL. But Mitnick claims that's a lie; he never could, nor tried, to do that. The Feds were desperate to convict and used whatever fallacious charge they could dream up. He was also accused of doing things which, in fact, were done by certain cronies of his. Still, he was awesome in what he did do.
I would say that if I were a hacker, I'd be a White Hat... or maybe gray. I differentiate between hackers and crackers. I totally approve of hackers.
Check out this film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3010462/
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline goldshirt*9

  • Super Hero
  • *******
  • Posts: 6361
  • Gender: Male
  • Who yous looking ats
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2014, 08:51:17 AM »
Have been listening to this Series
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00srz5b
Very interesting even as a bystander.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2014, 08:02:13 PM »
Nice.
If you get hooked and end up needing professional psychiatric help, you can always blame it on me.  ;D


And don't get me started about transfinite numbers and the different orders of infinity. What's that, you say? Different orders of infinity!? Well, I'm really happy that you asked...

Real numbers are all numbers such as whole numbers, fractions, irrational numbers, etc. Natural numbers are the countable numbers such like the ones we all know on the number line, (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10, 11, etc) which, we can all agree, continues into infinity. Now here's the thing... you can take any two numbers (say, 3 & 4) and try to count the fractions between them. 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, etc... all the way down the rabbit hole. Now, between any two fractions smaller fractions exist and between them, smaller ones ad infinitum. The infinities of those fractions located between any two arbitrary numbers on the line (like 3 & 4, to repeat myself) constitute an infinity which is larger in numbers than exist on the infinite number line of countable or computational whole numbers. Multiple infinities exist. Using Georg Cantor's method of one-to-one correspondence between all of the whole numbers (1 to infinity) and the fractions between any two whole numbers are termed a correspondence or cardinality (i.e. members of a set) of the set of whole numbers and the set of fractions. Cantor called the set of all natural numbers aleph-null and the set of fractions aleph-null+1. Which is larger? If you're actually still with me, let's take a moment to introduce the continuum. This is the name given to the set of all real numbers and exactly how much more infinite is it than aleph-null? As Georg Cantor showed, there were no sets with a cardinality between that of the set of natural numbers and the set of real numbers. Put another way, the natural numbers were aleph-null, then all the real numbers could be was aleph-one. This became known as the continuum hypothesis and the fraction set (aleph-one) seems to be the larger set; one infinity is larger than another infinity. The "larger" infinity is nested with the "smaller" infinity. And the real kick in the ass is that there are other alephs besides the two I just mentioned.
But, mercifully, I will stop here.
By the way, Cantor ended up going through a series of nervous breakdowns which eventually had him permanently institutionalized in the Bonkers Bungalow where he spent the rest of his life writing essays about William Shakespeare.
O God, I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, indeed.

Please don't hate me.  :'(
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2014, 02:28:38 PM »
I guess I am hated.*



*
Spoiler (hover to show)
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline goldshirt*9

  • Super Hero
  • *******
  • Posts: 6361
  • Gender: Male
  • Who yous looking ats
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #9 on: September 20, 2014, 12:07:04 AM »
hated by whom ?

Offline smokester

  • Administrator
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 14705
  • Gender: Male
  • Da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo!
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #10 on: September 21, 2014, 04:54:32 AM »
hated by whom ?

Some skirt that are fed up having to take flight in high heels.
Don't put off until tomorrow, what you can put off until the day after.

There is an exception to every rule, apart from this one.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2014, 07:19:57 AM »
Women in heels don't appeal to me. I prefer women in boots or sneakers.  ;D
I figure I'm hated for persisting in this hare-brained thread.
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.

Offline brickbatz

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
  • Gender: Male
  • Politically Incorrect
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #12 on: September 22, 2014, 04:12:19 AM »
I'd have to understand it or give a poo to hate over it.

Offline goldshirt*9

  • Super Hero
  • *******
  • Posts: 6361
  • Gender: Male
  • Who yous looking ats
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2015, 12:00:32 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34444233

Edward Snowden interview: 'Smartphones can be taken over'
interesting but not surprised in the least.
runs off to get an old nokia out lol

Offline xtopave

  • Site Modette
  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 28876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Prime phreaking
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2015, 02:18:29 PM »
Edward Snowden interview: 'Smartphones can be taken over'

Poor people who might take over my phone. They'll end up like Percy Wetmore in The Green Mile.  ;D