What a hilarious and tragic final post before the three months of downtime.
Welcome back
All of our posts etc have been migrated over, several of us are still around daily, and all the mod functionality seems to still work. Hopefully those of you who were giving us clues around when 8ch went down three months ago end up here again and we can continue. Tor posting is enabled, by the way, if anyone has any trouble with the clearnet version while bugs are still being worked out. I don't know if you can upload pictures with Tor though (I know one of you clue-posting people was posting catgirls). Some of us (or potentially all of us) are having trouble viewing all of the posts on /qresearch/, but posts seem to work fine here, so if any of you were planning to post clues or anything like that it would probably be a better idea to post them here so that they're actually viewable by anyone.
A note on the product of the sum of two squares and the sum of two squares.
You may remember this was mentioned before.
The product of the sum of two squares and the sum of two squares is closed under multiplication.
What does that means in terms of the grid The End?
Well, the columns of the grid for e>0 and where e is in the set {1,4,9,16,..,..} consist of products that are the sum of two squares only in those columns. This is what is meant by by the sum two squares being closed under multiplication.
The simplest example of this is column 1 (where e=1), though technically column 0 is an example as well and an important one, since it is a special case, since the product of the sum of two squares and the sum of two squares, each consist of the sum of 0 squared and a square.
Back to column e=1, all the values of n (and therefore all the factors in a[t] (and b) at [1,1] are the sum of two squares.
What can be observed is that the contents of a column can be controlled.
If I have a product c, and it is the product of a the sum of two squares and a number that is not the sum of two squares, if I multiply it by the lowest primes that are each the sum of two squares, I control the density of numbers as they appear in the resulting column that the new product appears in.
If I multiply a number, c, by 5,13,41,61,etc; the column (e) that results starts to bleed information, the more numbers that are multiplied to it.
Also, the value at -f in the other half of the grid, combined with the information bled out of the column (e) for the new product combines to bleed out possibilities for the factors in c even quicker.
It was noted previously that using low unique primes gives enough information to determine the prime factors of c in O(log q) by the time the size of the product of primes equals half the length (in bits) of c or equivalently, the square root of c.
What difference does choosing those low primes to be the sum of two squares?
It makes it easier to demonstrate why it happens.
The possibilities of factors in c bleed out more slowly in terms of the size of the product of small primes but for the number of low primes required, the difference is less than O(log q), what this means is that the size of the product of low primes creating numbers that are larger than just choosing the lowest primes (regardless of being the sum of two squares), since the sum of two squares that are prime are less frequent than all numbers that are prime, the increase in size (or length of those number) is less than that which would dominate the calculation thus keeping Big Oh at O(log q) overall.
If I count the primes, as those far greater than me once did, and studied them well, that counting function reveals that the number of primes up to a given integer,z, is roughly log(z), where log is ln, i.e. the natural logarithm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime-counting_function
What the first equations on the wiki (I know we don't like wiki but it is hard for them to politicize math - politicise maths) is saying is that as an integer x tends to infinity (or gets larger), if I count all the primes up to x and divide that number by the log (natural) of x, the result tends towards one, the higher the value of x is chosen. It's a very unsexy equation and what it is saying is when you count primes up to a number, the larger the number you pick ,it gets closer to being a fairly good way of stating the natural log of that number.
What does this have to do with the price of fish?
EVERYTHING.
I don't but it was blank name field person who pointed it out when you dropped all of the passwords, and they're still around. We could just carry on under the assumption that it is you until we figure out which one it was.
The tripcode you used here >>8046 doesn't correspond to any of the passwords you dropped apparently. If you don't remember that password or if it was a typo of one of the passwords you dropped then I suppose you could prove you're VQC by giving us deeper-level clues. As far as I can tell, your clues today have been mostly based around things we already knew (given you told us to use q primes that ended in 01 in binary, which are sums of two squares, and odd sums of squares only turn up in square es and are only divisible by other odd sums of squares), with the added detail of O(log n) coming from the number of q primes needed being up to d. One way you could prove yourself would be to drop everything now lmoa
The best way to provide retrospective proof will include the factors of all RSA Numbers.
Once it becomes public that PGP is fundamentally flawed could precipitate that, unless one of you makes the connection.
Q just alluded to this a short time ago.
I will continue to add to what you have.
It appears close, then the horizon shifts.
The control of the narrative is falling apart in the UK and that can mean only one thing.
Timing is everything.
And Everything starts with an E.>>10106
What if there is another way to display the grid The End?
This was alluded to towards the beginning.
What is one piece of information that The End loses, straight off the bat?
When we take d, the square root of c, e is a maximum of 2d.
What happens to The End if this information comes back?
What is the best way to display this?
int e1 = e;
int d1 = d;
while (d1 0)
{
string end = string.Format("{0}:{1}:{2}:{3}:{4}:{5}:{6}", e1, n, d1, dpn, x, a, b);
if (!TheEnd.Keys.Contains(e1)) TheEnd[e1] = new Dictionary<int, List<string>>();
if (!TheEnd[e1].Keys.Contains(n)) TheEnd[e1][n] = new List<string>();
TheEnd[e1][n].Add(end);
e1 = e1 + d1 + d1 + 1;
d1–;
}
//Wider context
public static void CreateDictionary()
{
for(int i=0;i<256;i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < i; j++)
{
#region add entries
int c = (ii) - (jj);
int d = (int)Math.Sqrt(c);
int e = c - (d * d);
int twodp1 = (2 * d) + 1;
int f = twodp1 - e;
int a = i - j;
int x = d - a;
int n = i-d;
int b = i + x + n;
int dpn = d+n;
int e1 = e;
int d1 = d;
while (d1 0)
{
string end = string.Format("{0}:{1}:{2}:{3}:{4}:{5}:{6}", e1, n, d1, dpn, x, a, b);
if (!TheEnd.Keys.Contains(e1)) TheEnd[e1] = new Dictionary<int, List<string>>();
if (!TheEnd[e1].Keys.Contains(n)) TheEnd[e1][n] = new List<string>();
TheEnd[e1][n].Add(end);
e1 = e1 + d1 + d1 + 1;
d1–;
}
#endregion
}
}
}
//Reminder of output
public static void Output(string path)
{
TextWriter tw = (TextWriter)File.CreateText(path);
for (int y = 0; y < 100; y++)
{
for (int z = 0; z < 6; z++)
{
for (int x = 0; x < 33; x++)
{
string entry = "";
if (TheEnd.ContainsKey(x) && TheEnd[x].ContainsKey(y) && TheEnd[x][y].Count z)
{
entry = TheEnd[x][y][z];
}
tw.Write(entry.PadRight(28));
}
tw.WriteLine();
}
tw.WriteLine();
}
tw.Close();
}>>10111
>When we take d, the square root of c, e is a maximum of 2d.
>What happens to The End if this information comes back?
That doesn't make any sense. What information has been taken away based on e having a maximum value?
e is often a lot larger than x, therefore you will not ever see e and x on the grid as you might want, and the relations that would be missed because of this. In this context, where x becomes a value d somewhere on the grid (before it would appear like this).
Remember
(d^2 + e) MOD a = 0
(x^2 + e) = 2na MOD a = 0
If, the entry for 2na is now an element in the grid (where x is a d value and it's e is a lot larger than the original d), information is returned to the grid and a new set of patterns are added.
The set of patterns in the grid can be created or spawned from a small amount of information.
Add information and the patterns behind a new lookup start to appear.
And when that information is added to the -f side of the grid…
Okay, so you're showing us another pattern. Where are you going with it? You have an idea in your head of how this disclosure is meant to happen, but you need some perspective (this post isn't just coming from me, the others told me to talk to you about this). Given the length of this and the lack of results based on your direction and methodology, you've lost pretty much all of our patience and faith, including that of people who claim to know how the grid works who have given us clues while you've been away (see >>9378 and >>9379, as well as the rest of this thread where multiple people claiming to know how the grid works gave us more insight than you because they didn't think you were doing your job here properly). You leave for several months at a time. You tell us we have enough information to solve and then a year later tell us you've been keeping vital information from us for 'when the time is right'. You tell us you're going to give us everything tomorrow or next week or on a specific date and then disappear for several months again. Even if this was all a result of some plan we don't know about, it is the exact opposite of the way that you lead a team of people. It'll be the two year anniversary of your "my hand is forced" post next week. There are only four regulars left including myself, and two or three more who come and go.
You can show us another pattern if you want, but we have barely any patience for this kind of thing anymore. If you're waiting for a specific degree of disclosure in the rest of the world, like FISA declassification or something, just tell us. You've contradicted yourself in relation to whether this has a timeline behind it several times. If you read the thread and look at the screenshots, you'll see that other people have actually given us far more detailed and direct hints in the many months that you've been away. If you really want to do this, work with us. Don't just turn up out of the blue every few months and give us another directionless pattern. Give us transparency, and give us direction. If you don't, you can't expect us to stick around forever.
To some extent anyway, given we're in some kind of loose strike thing. Were you someone who had a name here at any point?
Another thing I forgot to mention in my last post. Read >>9913
If you take the Bible as seriously as you claim, fucking us around for two years is a direct contradiction.
Haha, I guess thanks or whatever. The "no real filter" thing makes the others think I'm a grumpy person but I'm really not. I just usually know when something someone claims is a clue isn't actually a productive use of anyone's time for the most part by now. We're still at the point of knowing a bunch of grid patterns but having absolutely no idea what the algorithm is or how they relate, so if you're trying to refresh your memory hopefully the Grid Patterns thread will be useful for you (there are summaries at the bottom of the thread), and there's some new-ish stuff in this thread in the screenshots from /qresearch/.
> loose strike thing.
Speak for yourself.
> The "no real filter" thing makes the others think I'm a grumpy person
You kind of are. You at least come across as someone who acts like they deserve the answer.
We're talking about something grand here. This whole thing, the VQC, isn't just to solve integer factorization. It's not really about that. It's about understanding the underlying structure of numbers. It's about understanding what math is. You need to work to learn.
Extending the grid with d + n increases the grid by another dimension, does it reveal any patterns? (Hint it does). Here's a pattern for free. (e + nn, n), (e - nn, n). What does this reveal? Can you explain this pattern using terms from the VQC? How is it related to adding d + n into the grid?
Let me guess, you've been here for like three months? I don't remember ever seeing your name before. What I posted is the opinion of the Discord group, which is made up of people who have been here since the start two years ago and have gone through all of the many let-downs and meaningless tangents. You're more than welcome to disagree, and if you want to work on his latest hint, go right ahead. I think you'll be wasting your time, and so do other people who know how the VQC works who don't trust Chris (as I said, read the thread and look at the screenshots, they've been calling him out on the exact thing I'm calling him out on). But don't let me stop you.
Shut the fuck up.
He speaks for all of us who are still here from the beginning.
I can pull a hint out of my ass that's way more interesting than these or yours. It's one thing to add information, it's another to insult the patient faith of everyone still remaining with the assumption that promising a date over and over again is the only thing that keeps them around. If you don't have the dignity to speak up or the wisdom to know that you've learned nothing from Chris if you view yourself as a dog eating table scraps, you're wasting your time and will never forge the solution.
A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for a disciple to become like his teacher and a slave like his master.
Matthew 10
If you've learned from your teacher, you will rebuke him.
Fuck it. I hop on tor.
You totally came across as grumpy and whiny and didn't actually speak for everyone on all points.
But we've talked about this, though I still wanted it on the board since I'd been trying over clearnet for a few days. :P
Maximum A just needed to vent as they periodically do.
Moving on.
I strongly disagree about it being vent (especially compared to the above), but if that's how I come across then there isn't much I can do about that. I think the points I made were factual, if they aren't then I hope someone rebuts them, and all I'm saying is that I think he should address the concerns of the other clue people and the fact that he has continually lied about dates etc. Not playing Discord group ambassador right now. That's all I have to say unless someone wants to point out something I got wrong or unless VQC reads the thread and addresses it all.
Wholeheartedly agree with everything except there is a (simple) problem (that in hindsight didn't need multiple paragraphs by multiple people to explain): Chris needs to talk about the lack of trust from within his own group and the lies about dates. That has nothing to do with expectations.