Looking for a guy called Chris who likes maths and lives in the UK, please wake up and get on the internet Chris who likes maths and lives in the UK

endxab, ((a+b)/2)-d, x+x=2f+1, Riemann Zeta function, etc

>>9285573 (lb)

Speaking of someone in particular, has anything been happening outside of the board?

(0,n), (e,1) and (f,1), (e,n), (f,n), a[t]=an, a[t]=a(n-1), etc etc

>>9285609

>>9285662

Does PMA still turn up? He's always been quite active but he's not usually on the board, so I'm not sure if anything's changed there since I called Jan out on his bullshit.

>>9285672

I've explained it a few times on the other board, and you can see it in the first picture of each of my posts. Unknowns turn up as a chunk at the end of knowns in binary. It just doesn't work for really big numbers, which is why we need Chris back.

nn+2d(n-1)+f-1, triangular numbers, polite numbers, recursive functions, blah blah blah terminology so that Chris from the UK who likes maths will hopefully see this

>>9285743

No idea why it doesn't work with big numbers. It works with everything up to at least 3 million, but I stopped the algorithm I wrote to deduce that because it took I think more than 24 hours to get to that point. For all we know it could work all the way up to the RSA challenge numbers (which it doesn't work on). What I've been doing and posting about on our other board is trying every known against every unknown. It takes a couple hours for the smaller challenge numbers, probably more than a day for the bigger ones. It's meant to run in less than a second, so all this really means is we don't know which known to check for which unknown (hence the fishing trip).

>>9285776

>35565c

Here are all of the (e,n) elements for c35565:

(221,17595,94) = {221:17595:188:187:1:35565}

(221,5741,93) = {221:5741:188:185:3:11855}

(221,3371,92) = {221:3371:188:183:5:7113}

(221,1005,87) = {221:1005:188:173:15:2371}

>how do you limit the number of unknowns that you have to check against?

By giving up and asking Chris lmoa

c1155

(66,545,17) = {66:545:33:32:1:1155}

(66,161,16) = {66:161:33:30:3:385}

(66,85,15) = {66:85:33:28:5:231}

(66,53,14) = {66:53:33:26:7:165}

(66,25,12) = {66:25:33:22:11:105}

(66,13,10) = {66:13:33:18:15:77}

(66,5,7) = {66:5:33:12:21:55}

(66,1,1) = {66:1:33:0:33:35}

>>9285804

I was being sarcastic, what I meant was that we've exhausted all of our ideas so it seems like our best option is to update Chris on the binary pattern thing VA found and maybe he'll give us more information given we all clearly put a bunch of work in.

>>9285851

c1365

(69,647,18) = {69:647:36:35:1:1365}

(69,193,17) = {69:193:36:33:3:455}

(69,103,16) = {69:103:36:31:5:273}

(69,65,15) = {69:65:36:29:7:195}

(69,23,12) = {69:23:36:23:13:105}

(69,17,11) = {69:17:36:21:15:91}

(69,7,8) = {69:7:36:15:21:65}

(69,1,1) = {69:1:36:1:35:39}

>>9285953

c = ab

c = dd + e

c = (d+n)(d+n) - (x+n)(x+n)

Grid = [e,n,t] (or [-f,n,t])

>>9286015

For c, a'[t] = an, where a' is the Grid value at [e,1,t] and where we then know that [e,1,t+n] = bn

For c, a[t] = a(n-1), where a is the Grid value at [-f,1,t] and where we then know that [-f,1,t+n-1] = b(n-1)

>>9286093

e = c - (dd)

b = c / a

n = ((a + b) / 2) - d

d + n = i

x = d - a

Come on Chris get on the internet, you've been online around this time a bunch of times before

>>9286260

Please do, you're not the person I'm looking for anyway.

>>9286267

Incorrect but thanks for giving me an excuse to make the text field in my post more eye-catching so I'll potentially get the attention of the person I'm looking for.

>>9286354

Keep mentioning irrelevant concepts, keep giving me a reason to post these pretty pictures

>>9286407

Or you could just pay attention to something else dude. I'm waiting for a specific person to get online and I'm using these pictures to get their attention.