You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
while count < number_of_needed_numbers:
start_time = time.time() # get first time first time for beauty of math
print("start time ", start_time)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time = time.time() # get second time second time for beauty of math
print("end time ", end_time)
low_time = ((end_time + start_time) / 2) # covert to one time
print("low time ", low_time)
start_time1 = time.time() # get third time third time for beauty of math
print("start time1 ", start_time1)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time1 = time.time() # get fourth time fourth time for beauty of math
print("end time1 ", end_time1)
high_time = ((end_time1 + start_time1) / 2) # convert to one time
print("high time ", high_time)
random.seed((high_time + low_time) / 2) # convert to one time for seed
random_number = random.randint(lowest_random_number_needed, highest_random_number_needed)
count += 1
print(random_number)
Add first and second time, then divide by two. The answer is column D top. Add third and fourth time, then divide by two. The answer is column D bottom.
Now take the two times in D and add them, then divide by two for REAL SEED.
Explanation about the seed. To use time as a seed, you must get all the data for time as done above. If you use only one time you have failed to get the ¾ of “TIME.” It takes all four to get a usable time.
Binary is 0 and 1. The Mean is 0.5. The upper set is for zero, middle of the “seed” is Mean or 0.5, bottom set is for one. The complete time.
By now it is hard to believe that the government (NSA, NIST) does not know about this ‘new math knowledge’.
Question, Why would they NOT even acknowledge the ‘new math knowledge? Have not even reply to emails.
Therefore, the best thing that one can do is to present, as possible, what he has as 'new knowledge' without expecting any positive reaction... with the hope that his 'new knowledge' doesn't oppose, in any way, the interests of some powerful rich groups which are based on 'old knowledge'.
Thank you for the wise words of concern. I am a sixty percent disabled veteran, seventy-three years old, in poor health. I believe it would be like beating a dead horse if they did anything. First, it is basic mathematics because it takes random numbers to be able to see mathematics clearly. Second, I believe I have given enough to the country. NSA would not even acknowledge receiving my information, so I did my duty to the country. Third, because this is basic math, to withhold this from public knowledge would be a much larger harm, in time. Short term, it may cause some problems.
I must THANK the forum for allowing this “new knowledge” to be on the forum. This is the only forum that would allow it on their forum. I have been able to get this possible ‘new knowledge’ out to the world. There is a need for more research into random numbers. If you read “ MONTHLY-D-23-00632.pdf”, you will see that there were two pieces of new knowledge. Because this has been so poorly received and not universally understood, the second part cannot be brought forward because it won’t be understood.
America is not an open society when it comes to who can bring new knowledge forward. If you are not part of the money-making scheme, colleges, and major corporations. New information cannot get past the publishing gate keepers unless it’s fits their need (control knowledge and money generation.)
You can lead a horse to water for a drink, but you cannot make him drink. The same is true about “new knowledge.” Think of how many books are incorrect about digital computers making “real random numbers” now. How long before this is corrected in schools and colleges?
I can now pass at the end of my time. I was able to get the information out to the world. There is something about coming to the end of your life and wanting the world to be better for your living.
Any comments and thoughts are appreciated,
woodturner550
Time to talk concepts to go further. Problem: How to keep the key for decrypting safe.
Understanding the problem: If a person has a key, even if it is in memory only, then the “rubber hose to the bottom of your feet” is the answer. So even with secure random numbers and a “one time pad” it is not secure yet.
This is the best I could come up with: To keep it simple, the model is just between two people. Each part is about 35k. Encrypt part and the decrypt part, has 100 sets of data keys. Each person has their half only of 3.5mb in a USB drive. This could be an example of a decrypt key, D0.55484938621521.txt. It takes about a minute to make one key data with an average computer. Then the ‘decrypt USB drive’ is given to the other party as securely as possible.
When encrypting a file, the “encrypt” keys on the USB drive must be made available to the program, all 100 of them at the beginning. The program will then randomly choose one for this message. The key that is used, is deleted both from sending computer and sender’s USB drive at end of use. The last four digits of the key will be at the beginning of the file name, example: “1521A Sexy birthday wish.txt.” to your friend.
The decrypt computer with the USB drive connected, looks for the key on the USB drive. If it is there, it uses the key and deletes it from the USB drive and computer at end of use.
MESSAGE AND KEYS SECURE
If the USB drive is lost, it is not a problem, make new keys for new USB drives. Weak point, how to know ‘if and when’ the USB drive is compromised (copied etc.). To limit this weakness, wear the USB drive as a necklace. For a journal both encrypt and decrypt are on the USB drive. For journals a second copy of the keys should be keep in a safe and secure place, safe etc, in case of lost keys. Encrypted secure USB drives are available that erase completely if tampered with or ten chances at the password before deleting data. The question then is, “Is there a back door?”
But there is still a weak point. Remember anything written in secret, may be able to be read. All that can be done is limit the risk. We KNOW that without the key the data is totally secure. No matter what scheme is used, they all have the weakness of compromised keys.
Now available, my Google drive. Now all files can be shared. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/10sdIAKrlNCRP63OS87THpNN0RYn5oJ3R?usp=sharing
Look in the folder “one time pad” or “many times pad”. ONE TIME PAD.py shows the encrypt dictionaries and the decrypt dictionaries in the output, these go on the USB drives. “Many time pad” can be of any shape of rectangle, it does not matter to the computer. A ‘many times pad’ could be any size that would not be needed to change in the right situation, such as a corporation encrypting all data on the fly. The computers are secured under lock and key. But you still have the weakness of people being compromised. Maybe, encrypt within the computer itself. I am NOT a cryptographer, just using deductive logic.
So far what has been done is to prove that digital computers CAN create “real random numbers” that are secure from cracking by brut force or calculation. The Challenge showed how to encrypt a data set (cards) securely. The Challenge used dynamic variables to stop linguists from counting characters to try to crack the code.
As already stated, “one time pad” is the only secure encryption scheme. We now can make secure “one-time pads”. Why make a small “one time pad” instead of a larger one that can be used more than once? For example: a 26 by 385 grid gives us 10, 010 containers to put letters in. I use 81 characters for my “one time pad. "A", "B", 'C', 'D', "E", "F", "G", "H", "I", "J", "K", "L", "M", "N", "O", "P", "Q", "R", "S", "T", "U", "V", "W", "X", "Y", "Z", "a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "f", "g", "h", "i", "j", "k", "l", "m", "n", "o", "p", "q", "r", "s", "t", "u", "v", "w", "x", "y", "z", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "0", ",", ".", "?", ":", "!", "@", "$", %", "&", "(", ")", "/", "*", "-", "+", "=", " ", "/n", ";".
That gives us 123.5 containers for each character average. How long can this be used before it needs to be changed with a new “one time pad”? I call this new “one time pad”, the “many times pad.”
By doing it with a large “many times pad”, it solves one of the big problems with ”one time pads”. Getting the next “many times pad” is easy, just send it encrypted with the current “many times pad.” This means we only have to move one “many times pad” securely to the receiver.
Many programmers are “fighting the war” of security, with before computers mentality. Computers can handle data very efficiently compared with humans by hand. So, let’s use that to our advantage with the “many times pad.”
Now all the files can be found at https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wpd5-2-4SZkZka284sbpyYjHIdLNQ60T
Thanks Michael
Maybe the Romans did the world a big disservice by conquering Greece. There new knowledge was cherished and debated, now not so much.
More programs for a better understanding:
https://codefile.io/f/p95ZebEuC0
https://codefile.io/f/QUhgJeuuwd
https://codefile.io/f/95iu8pP712
https://codefile.io/f/EPpON7BGQJ
https://codefile.io/f/9bizl8rtgt
Thanks for the idea of wikipedia! I am checking out "if" and 'how' to do it.
Any other ideas?
Just got this from wikipedia. "No original research is allowed here. Your forum post is best disseminated on some other more suitable platform actively soliciting such material."
World makes it hard to bring new knowledge to the general public.
Gain access to ResearchGate
Your institution email
tomanytroubles@gmail.com
Sorry, we couldn't verify that you are a researcher from the information you provided.
We therefore require you to enter your institution email address to verify that you are a scientific professional.
Bob,
I want to thank you for allowing my post! This is the first forum to allow it. As you know this breaks new ground. That is hard for people educated to believe that what they ‘know’ will always be that way. They also have the major problem of not being able to use deductive logic, therefore they have problems thinking clearly about a problem. It is easier to just go with the flow as taught. Tried to post it to the ‘coder’s corner’ section, they took it down as fast as they could.
One thing that no one has asked about, the wait time. Count how small the time is in the program. Something is not correct here, to many 0’s. This is one of those times where being old school, having to be familiar with ‘assemble language’. I’m indirectly addressing the register in the CPU and resetting it so it will latch onto the next nano second time. Try commenting out the wait time and see what it does. The second time will be exactly as the first time.
Please, I would like any comments on how to get this out to the public? I have tried to get this ‘published’ only to be rejected. I cannot get it past the gate keepers.
Please, share this.
Thanks,
Leonard Dye
What more can I do to bring this forward? I tried to publish, didn't interest enough people and did not 'flow.' The one place I have not tried is the 'dark web.' Part of the problem is I'm giving away for private use.
Any other ideas?
Thanks,
woodturner550
My bad! Thanks for pointing it out. I don't do fraction very often. Not an excuse.
This is how I was taught. Thought process first.
1/3 2/9 1/4 3/16 3/10 original
split problem:
1/3+2/9
1/3 2/9 = 3/9 + 2/9 = 5/9
1/4 3/16 3/10 = 4/16 + 3/16 = 7/16 + 3/10
7/16 + 3/10 = 21/160
21/160+5/9 = 105/1440 are /5
21/288
woodturner550
Bob,
I was taught deductive logic and has served me well, but I am not in the teaching field.
"One problem with people with deductive logic understanding, they are harder to lead. Isn't that a good thing rather than a problem." That depends on the government. Do they just want people who will work as a cog in their wealth and power generating system or do they want clear thinking people to be able to live their best lives.
Bob,
Any idea why deductive logic is not taught at the very beginning of a child's education? Then proofs make sense as well as creating clear thinking. Once the early proofs are understood then upper mathematics is easier to conceptualize concepts.
One problem with people with deductive logic understanding, they are harder to lead.
Bob,
Thanks for your input. Email me and I will send the data to you, two hundred sets of sixty thousand binary bits put into Excel 365. The email address is in the Copyright notice. As for moving this, it is up to the forum. However, remember that computer programmers are taught that this is not possible.
One thing that I do not think people think about is that our country monitors other countries including their internet forums. Do you think other countries don't monitor our forums? Do you think that China or Russia already has this now! Yes. They monitor me. This is basic math. It is just as necessary as addition or subtraction for proper understanding of mathematics.
Yes Bob, there are a lot of tests for randomness. However, if one looks carefully, they are just approximations of randomness. I will be glad to send them to you or you can download them from NIST for free.
This is part of the data. This covers the entire 12,000,000 bits.
Maximum Minimum Spread
0.504966667 0.493466667 0.0115 Mean
0.5 0.499957314 4.2686E-05 Standard Deviation
298 -392 690 Over and under 30,000
0.499999973 Standard Deviation of 12,000,000 bits
0.5 Best Possible Standard Deviation of binary
Thanks for everyone's interest.
woodturner550
So, I need to sell it. Explain how and what this does, making the world a better place. Let us look at a few:
1. Privacy: This makes personal privacy a reality. Private thoughts, journals of all types, political discussions, business secrets and governments. This program’s output cannot be calculated by a quantum computer because it uses future knowledge, therefore, encryption is secure for all.
2. Games: The program for the random numbers that games use, such as dealing cards are being generated by a pseudo random number generator. Their output is slanted from truly random. We as a people have agreed to accept it as REAL RANDOM in everyday life. Now games can really be fair.
3. Mathematics: There are few mathematical fields that do not used random numbers. Mathematics is the language that helps make
sense of our world. Therefore, our view of the world might be clearer.
a.Especially important is the fact that real random numbers are easy and cheap to make with any digital computer capable of
running Python 3.7+.
This ‘new knowledge’ is free to use for personal use. For any other use must be licensed to ensure there are no back doors in the program, but the program is free to use once in compliance.
I’m very pleased that this forum understands what has been done. This is just the first step in bringing ‘new knowledge’ to all. This must be peer reviewed! It has been sent to NSA and they don’t reply or even acknowledge receiving the project.
Understanding that it is taught in computer classes that a digital computer cannot make ‘real’ random numbers because it follows a set of commands, it will always only make ‘pseudo’ random numbers. This is incorrect as has been shown. However, those educated in digital computers, including professors, are so blinded by their educated understanding that they won’t even look at possible ‘new knowledge.’
How to bring this forward is the part I don’t have the answer to. I’m hoping this forum entry will be shown to others and maybe people will open up to new learning.
Just as a side note, this has the possibility of being able to help in the stopping of ‘Ransomware’ attacks.
Thanks for your reply. This is what this program will affect.
Number Theory; Linear and Multilinear Algebra; Potential Theory; Statistics; Numerical Analysis; Statistical Mechanics, Structure of Matter.
Also this has a direct bearing on cryptography, because it is unbreakable by quantum computers.
I understand that this is not a programing forum, but in this case, it is necessary to say that so far all that is known is the theory and the deductive logic. A little knowledge can be very dangerous. Do not be afraid that you have wasted your time. I will be showing how the algorithm is applied to get quality ‘random numbers.’ If ‘time’ is not used correctly the output will not have the needed quality.
I work with Python 3.7+ for the programing language. I also used PyCharm for my IDE, it is great.
# This program was written in spaghetti code style. This is done for clarity. Output is the same when written normally.
# Programing can be misunderstood by some people who want to try splitting hairs.
# Author: Leonard Dye, tomanytroubles@gmail.com, May 31, 2024 - Copyrighted 10/14/2023
import time
import random
def challenge():
number_of_needed_numbers = 10
count = 0
lowest_random_number_needed = 0
highest_random_number_needed = 1
while count < number_of_needed_numbers:
start_time = time.time() # get first time
print("start time ", start_time)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time = time.time() # get second time
print("end time ", end_time)
low_time = ((end_time + start_time) / 2) # covert to one time
print("low time ", low_time)
start_time1 = time.time() # get third time
print("start time1 ", start_time1)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time1 = time.time() # get fourth time
print("end time1 ", end_time1)
high_time = ((end_time1 + start_time1) / 2) # convert to one time
print("high time ", high_time)
random.seed((high_time + low_time) / 2)
random_number = random.randint(lowest_random_number_needed, highest_random_number_needed)
count += 1
print(random_number)
print("")
print("")
if __name__ == '__main__':
challenge() # go to top, 'def challenge'
If there are any questions, please ask! I have tried to make things clear with out over writing the subject. If it is not clear to you then most likely there are other people with the same problem.
Thanks,
woodturner550
Bob,
You are on the correct path. The real test is of the QUALITY of the random numbers.
"0.499999973 Standard Deviation of 12,000,000 bits
0.5 Best Possible Standard Deviation of binary
To really understand this, the data is important and must be understood.
Thanks,
Leonard Dye
Another way to view this:
The Challenge!
This is a thought challenge. The “seed” for random numbers is unknowable, using time. When you click on a stopwatch at the beginning of an event, that marks the beginning of the event. Do you know the EXACT nano-second the event started? No. It was moved out of the future and moved into the “NOW,” it is an unknowable data point till it happens.
To make this something common, let us use shuffling cards.
Python is used for this example. Using “list methods” therefore using “pop” and “insert,” which is the same as “remove from list” and “add to list.”
Rule 1. The length of the list changes with every pop or insert before the next random number is
generated. This is reflected on every random number generated using time (Nano) or no
seed (input).
Rule 2. When it is time to do “discard recovery” a random number is generated for each card and
inserted. For this exercise, each card should be reinserted before the next one is drawn.
1. Make a list of fifty-two card values. Any order is just one state of the cards.
2. Set the number of cards in the list.
3. Get a random number.
4. Print card value.
5. Set the number of cards on the list.
6. Get a random number.
7. Insert card
8. Repeat 1010 times, 2 through 7 in a single command.
9. Print the first 999 cards for the public.
10. Print the last ten cards for the secret part. The easiest way is to print two copies, one secret and
remove the last ten cards before making 999 public.
11. When the answer is arrived at, check it against the secret list. Understanding the pure logic of this is important. But your wrong answer is the proof that this is correct.
***End of Challenge**
Note: This works just as well dealing with multiple cards before “discard recovery” and replacing in list before next hand. Most important before every random number must update the length of the list. Even knowing the ten cards that are secret, proving that you know what the card should be is not possible.
Stopwatch Problem
1. Time, it includes hours, minutes, seconds and nanoseconds. True or False
2. Clicking the button at the start of an event marks the beginning of the event. True or False
3. The value of the beginning of the event CANNOT be known before it happens. True or False
4. Output of a digital stopwatch CANNOT be known before it appears on screen. True or False
5. Therefore, time can be used as an unknowable data point. True or False
****************************************
The above is deductive logic. Every statement is either true or false. This leads to clear thinking about a problem. Knowledge learned and understood this way cannot be disproved unless ‘new knowledge’ on the problem is found.
If you agree that all five are true, then we can proceed with the knowledge that nobody can know the time at the beginning of an event.
Thanks
Leonard
I am 73 years old, and a private researcher. What I have been working on for thirty-five years, most people will not understand. However, most people agree and understand this fact, “currently the future is unknowable before it happens.” Proof of this, “if we knew what was going to happen in the future, we would have a perfect society able to sidestep or eliminate problems before they happen. The stupidity is thinking that “you know the future.” or “what will happen in the future is obvious.” If that were true, we would all be Bitcoin millionaires.”
The PROBLEM is creating random numbers using a formula, as currently done. This is incorrect. Generating random numbers caused by a formula can be reverse engineered. Therefore, they are not secure. I can make secure random numbers because I do not use a formula, I use future knowledge.
Example of future knowledge: When you click the button on a stopwatch to start an event, the exact nano-second is unknowable till it happens.
I am interested in learning who and how to show this project too. Data as Excel365 and Word365.
Understanding Project Goals:
1. Make an indeterminate system from a deterministic system.
2. Formula to qualify ‘random number generator’ output.
3. Create “Real Random Numbers” with a digital computer.
Output goals:
1. It looks random. This means that it passes all the statistical tests of randomness that we can find.
2. It is unpredictable. It must be computationally infeasible to predict what the next random bit will be, given complete knowledge of the algorithm or hardware generating the sequence and all the previous bits in the stream.
3. It cannot be reliably reproduced. If you run the sequence generator twice with the exact same input (at least as exact as humanly possible), you will get two completely unrelated random sequences.
The output of a generator satisfying these three properties will be good enough for a one-time pad, key generation, and any other cryptographic applications that require a truly random sequence generator.
This project’s output is unbreakable even with quantum computers.
Thanks,
Leonard Dye
Pages: 1