3 factorisation methods tested

We tested three different ways to split big numbers into their hidden prime factors. Every method ran, produced correct answers and told us exactly why it worked. Then we checked the published research and found each idea had already been discovered, some of them decades ago. The methods work, we know why, and we know who got there first.

Three BYT-WYZE studies tested different factorisation methods. Each worked exactly as intended, and each turned out to be already known. The plain-English summary of what was proved and where each method stops.

3 factorisation methods tested.

Knowing where something stops is a result.

What were these three studies really about?

A cubic instead of a square.

A grid instead of a number.

A knot instead of a formula.

More complicated never meant more capable.

Three methods, tested the same honest way.

Programme summary · Three tested methods

Each one worked. None of them was new.

The cubic method · The matrix method · The quantum knot method

We built three different ways to split big numbers into their hidden prime factors, ran each one properly, and every method did exactly what the mathematics said it would. Then we checked the published research and found that each idea had already been discovered, some of them decades ago. So we know the methods work, we know why they work, and we know exactly who got there first.

Why this is not three failures

Each method was built, run and checked until we could say precisely what it does, why it does it and who published the idea first. That is finished work, not three abandoned side quests.