Yes - All Twelve in one go

Not a word in the sky

I keep reading the title of the previous entry as 'Reality-Based Electronic Multiplier'. It is actually a reference to a device which was partially built by Alan Turing which he thought would encipher binary representations of alphabetic characters by multiplying them by huge numbers which could not be determined by calculation within a useful time limit. The book I read it in seemed to imply at first, that it was just a multiplication by a large number but later it talked about largest common factors which sounds suspiciously like public-key encryption. Maybe Turing had the idea in the 1930s long before anyone else. The technology was just not available to put it into practice.

The following encryption is True

tKrI\G@GN-gwM&]r*orFE}ve77H=Zb$C_%)X~;$Kq_Nc Oq.ySgd~.KsFTj%zxnYuv:/C1fx>V9/_QJG6JamjbH:1`5^QV'hISEk Vs MtpYY)ONQ74*sa/6-Kg,8'vlEg>iH=e V}EI^d3L|wS\lvQjz5HlE^@c_uh1:S^(!=*n((31]0B>8Lh)%f=3{o`-M82;rXMe@GH>B)Y4Zte6(S_1$Uo~8(\aNXBig0|ENEAQ#v5S5/yK,#EE':-:nctc]g!oa>2%C]=?>0 J?#.M3I9zEBp%G;&qpd#w3d}N:L_-T1sM%0`aB"{LxKJJWp9slZ |hw$m{Wr&'c7Je,(^[w1>0bQfB}%/drsQH,P\la.nj,sa1OI4m4w`ZmU)STy$%sl1o*:d7v_$#t9"VwV\l96'1FtX-jGFC200tRSi;m4t?Q[KC-knpnR*4/8#1XW#p NYR=)22"Zn6#$Mzkow?s#_tVWoNj4Vx^sGKcx ,zvH&@^A 0dB^uaMe<6xniJl.N|SD&(*39$xx5(c'}kL(aZJ.#{{a5:2,o+L6g0IpnmSV9]$aM3]`8~SyzjX!{h5CM!Pr4y'E`E9~Ze9Ix>6/Dl#\m&7~4GCIfp`/+LO16D0_-buo91'kzj5O\)%A)8yno@R?`rHTU&}Il-sVM22{2a{aZ!A5^!o9w{b05JjNN3{>K27'TM~}Atu;a$})<;D2{VH

The Previous Link is False.

Someone will defactorise public keys one day. It cannot be difficult. What is the proportion of Prime numbers at any one point? Is all this incompleteness? Do I actually understand anything which I am writing. Roll on quantum encryption.



Most of the deep maths in the Turing book is going over my head though it may be that I am just skipping it to get to the bits about cryptanalysis and Bletchley park. Maybe more of note here then.

There is no structure to today's entry. I have noticed from reading other blogs, that a lot of bloggers do not even attempt to put their entries into context. They assume that the reader knows everything so in effect, the blog is just written for them. I know I have some bits like that but I think most of it is explained though of course that leads to the danger of being patronising if you explain every little thing. This has built up a little strange loop in my head. If the blog is purely for the author then why blog? You do not need to explain anything because you know it all anyway. It must be as a memory aid for when you come to read it later. Loads of my really old poems are like that. They are so obscure that I don't remember what they are about anymore; even the simplest bits do not remind me of anything. Some of them still have poetic merit (well I think so) but if they don't mean anything to me, are they any use or any good? Returning to blogging. The blog simply becomes an end in itself. The most important thing is to have content of some sort preferably in a good style. This leads to blogs looking like those sample pages you get in publishing manuals where the text is either gibberish or Latin (or Gibberish so written as to look like latin).



We found this in the dunes at Uig Sands on the Isle of Lewis. There were a whole lot of sculptures made out of rocks. Actually thinking about it, we actually made this one to go with all the rest. It seems that various people stumble on this sculpture garden and add their own to it.

Station 12 of the Tokaido.