Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[NAKAMOT0]

You are right, the common factor for PVK addresses is not just the difference in PVK values.

  I will tell you a mathematical relationship between PVK values that can be easily calculated.

 The PVK value of address 5 is 21 because address 4 has a PVK of 8, and address 5 is the next first value after 4. So, 21 = PVK 5 = PVK 4 + 8.

 Do you understand?  If you still don't understand, I'll give you another example.  Suppose we are looking for the PVK value of address 7. We know that the PVK value of address 6 is 49.

 We understand that the PVK value of address 7 is = to the nearest prime number after 49. The next prime number after 49 is 61.

 So address 7 is at PVK 61.

 Now you understand?

Satoshi is too busy doing things about gods to be commenting here on the theories of mere mortals.

What you're telling me is that as if I were saying the following.

Address 2, pvk decimal value: 3
Address 3, pvk decimal value: 7
Address 4, pvk decimal value: 8
Address 5, pvk decimal value: 21
Address 6, pvk decimal value: 49
Address 7, pvk decimal value: 76
Address 8, pvk decimal value: 224
Address 9, pvk decimal value: 467
Address 10, pvk decimal value: 514

9 and 10 =467

because 9*10 = (90 + (224 + 76 + 49 + 21 + 8 )) - 1= 467

What I did was create a mathematical pattern, conveniently to get the value I want, but this is just an illusion.
Therefore, I don't see much sense in your explanation.

I'm not one to judge, but in science we speak with evidence.

You have used an interesting progression but in reality if you look at the value of direction 7 you determine it from another progression.

 What I have explained to you is the thought process to solve the progression that is equal to the PVK values of that address.

 It's a similar process to the one you use to calculate address 7, but here you need to take another mathematical progression into account.  You are right that what you have done in your example is an illusion.  But in the example that I have given you, there is a mathematical pattern behind each PVK value of each address following an order.  You yourself have given a clue about this: the common factor is not only the difference in PVK values but the mathematical relationship between one address and the next address.



It also goes without saying that I am not satoshi, we are not the same person.

[mcdouglasx]

I am the creator.

You are quite right, 161-256 are silly.  I honestly just did not think of this.  What is especially embarrassing, is this did not occur to me once, in two years.  By way of excuse, I was not really thinking much about the puzzle at all.

I will make up for two years of stupidity.  I will spend from 161-256 to the unsolved parts, as you suggest.  In addition, I intend to add further funds.  My aim is to boost the density by a factor of 10, from 0.001*length(key) to 0.01*length(key).  Probably in the next few weeks.  At any rate, when I next have an extended period of quiet and calm, to construct the new transaction carefully.

A few words about the puzzle.  There is no pattern.  It is just consecutive keys from a deterministic wallet (masked with leading 000...0001 to set difficulty).  It is simply a crude measuring instrument, of the cracking strength of the community.

Finally, I wish to express appreciation of the efforts of all developers of new cracking tools and technology.  The "large bitcoin collider" is especially innovative and interesting!

It also goes without saying that I am not satoshi, we are not the same person.

If the creator says there is no pattern, why do you say there is one?
If you found something magical, why don't you claim the puzzle yourself?
If you are the creator, why don't you reveal the pk of the solved puzzles?
Or if you are rich enough to not care about the amount of the puzzle, why don't you take the money from puzzle 66 and distribute it to someone here or by choosing random addresses?
because if you want to give clues to something, you must start by giving truthful evidence.
Because the truth is that many of us are navigating this world without money to walk along dead-end roads, it's a bit cruel to give false clues, right?

[citb0in]

don't feed the troll, make it simple --> ignore him. The creator of the puzzle has no intension to convince or teach anyone in here. This psycho digaran still insists in being crazy. Whenever you read something about substraction or difference in here, just ignore it, it's ill Digaran. I can highly recommend to ignore him as well his dupe fake accounts he's creating.

Back to the facts, remember what this puzzle is about and what facts were given. And don't forget that this guy (=creator of that BTC puzzle) has proven he controls the related addresses. Nothing more to say, just as simple - period

[saatoshi_falling]

Now you understand?

I've enlisted the help of my imaginary friends, Fibonacci and Euclid, for an epic escapade through the primeval forest of PVK values and the enigmatic realm of depressed progressions. Armed with nothing but a slide rule and a cat's evil eye, we've sacrificed Netflix binging to decode cryptographic riddles, as the crypto-gods eagerly await our impending mathematical breakthrough.

Let's ride the prime number rollercoaster together and unveil the grand secret hidden within the pattern that goes beyond PVK values. I'm convinced we're on the verge of a breakthrough that will shake the foundations of mathematical academia.
The pulse of the prime force guides our quest, and we stand on the cusp of a revelation that promises to echo through the corridors of intellectual history. Get ready for the revelation of the century!

I must say this is the funniest thing I've read in this thread. So much that I finally made an account after doing the pick photos with Motorcycles Captcha 5 times in a row.
A few words about digaran.  I've read through all your post, and I can safely say that you have transcended beyond the limits of the final keyspace. Congrats. 

[nomachine]

creator says there is no pattern

This is the fact that there is no pattern. But it's not random either. There is an exact math formula for making this puzzle with some script, errors = ZERO.  With high decimal precision (mp.dps = 20 at least)
And the formula is in the creator's mind. This is all I have to say in public and outside the SCIF room  

[citb0in]

saatoshi_falling = another candidate created to treat Digarans' psychosis
 

it's unbelievable, It's so ridiculous that it's funny again. Such a split personality with this delusion actually belongs in the Hall of *ame. The real creator of the puzzle would only come forward by proving his identity so that anyone following the thread here can confirm it for themselves. All the others are weak characters with split personalities and delusions of god.

[3dmlib]

Hello. If search key range for a key by different search methods simultaneously is it will change probability theory expected value? Thanks.

[nomachine]

Hello. If search key range for a key by different search methods simultaneously is it will change probability theory expected value? Thanks.

If you are using different search methods to find a key within a certain range, the probability distribution of the outcome may change based on the efficiency and characteristics of each search method. In practice, using multiple search methods may increase the chances of finding the key, but it doesn't change the fundamental concepts of probability theory.

This is more like poker game here . In poker, players make decisions based on their assessment of the probabilities of different outcomes. They consider factors like the cards they hold, the community cards on the table, and the potential actions of their opponents.

In any case, it is a gamble if you want to invest a large amount of resources to solve the puzzle.

[AlanJohnson]

Hello. If search key range for a key by different search methods simultaneously is it will change probability theory expected value? Thanks.

If you are using different search methods to find a key within a certain range, the probability distribution of the outcome may change based on the efficiency and characteristics of each search method. In practice, using multiple search methods may increase the chances of finding the key, but it doesn't change the fundamental concepts of probability theory.

This is more like poker game here . In poker, players make decisions based on their assessment of the probabilities of different outcomes. They consider factors like the cards they hold, the community cards on the table, and the potential actions of their opponents.

In any case, it is a gamble if you want to invest a large amount of resources to solve the puzzle.

In gambling you can be just lucky ... this shit is something far worse. People don't realize how low is the chance to "win" here. 

You  can be lucky and win buying a lucky lottery ticket  but here you are dealing with something like: "is it possible to when you go out you accidentally meet Elon Musk that will offer you a job as his assistant but then he will die in a heart attack an hour later and when you realize it the plane will crash right on your head ?"   Yes, theoretically it is possible ..but will that happen ?

[digaran]

A few words about digaran

Lol, even the great satoshi himself is obsessed with diggy.
When I was a little kid, the elders of family used to face my parents saying: this kid will either get you or himself killed with his grown ups political opinions (revealing the secrets behind government's behaviour type of stuff). Now this might be that day!

HELLO, wiki liks, smowden, hornets, easily traceable little cute troll, rings any bell? At least pay for my protection before shining the spotlight on me, lol.

So you have my post history archived to have a laugh later? Guess what? 😏 ..... lol
Your beloved community has let me down, I have lost more than I could gain(earn, learn). And your choice of a curve is proving to have the same Mr. Scrooge characteristics as it's foster father. 😉
Locking my account and leaving these treacherous shark infested waters would be the most logical decision.
Take care, be happy, be fruitful, truthful and support young and talented developers, they just need a little bit of love and motivation, make several teams to have your back in every field!

Thank you for the efforts and dedication, may we see each other on the other side.

[nomachine]

In gambling you can be just lucky ... this shit is something far worse. People don't realize how low is the chance to "win" here. 

I have discovered a multitude of scripts and programs on GitHub, numbering at least 96, all claiming to provide solutions for a specific puzzle. This abundance of solutions may give rise to unrealistic expectations, fostering a misleading belief that the puzzle is easily solvable. While some Python scripts may effectively tackle the puzzle within the 1-30 range, attempting to extend the solution beyond 40 seem to be practically unfeasible.

The widespread use of such scripts not only generates false hope but also implies a certain level of promotion for the developers themselves rather than a genuine commitment to solving the puzzle.

[AlanJohnson]

In gambling you can be just lucky ... this shit is something far worse. People don't realize how low is the chance to "win" here. 

I have discovered a multitude of scripts and programs on GitHub, numbering at least 96, all claiming to provide solutions for a specific puzzle. This abundance of solutions may give rise to unrealistic expectations, fostering a misleading belief that the puzzle is easily solvable. While some Python scripts may effectively tackle the puzzle within the 1-30 range, attempting to extend the solution beyond 40 seem to be practically unfeasible.

The widespread use of such scripts not only generates false hope but also implies a certain level of promotion for the developers themselves rather than a genuine commitment to solving the puzzle.

You are right. I also tested many programs from github until i started slowly realize how incredibly big are the numbers i'm dealing with a what is the probability to solve puzzles.

Some of programs that can be find on github are utterly stupid - i saw  programs that load the list of so called "dormant bitcoin addresses" a then they are trying to guess the private key to them randomly in 256 bit range. If you think for a moment you can clearly see how stupid it is since there was a big struggle to hit even 64bit puzzle.

Now the 66  is even more difficult. I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

[nomachine]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

[AlanJohnson]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

Well it depends ... There is small luck factor.  I can often see people calulating it in a way "how much time it will take to scan the whole range with your currents keys generating speed"...  But you can do it randomly or the right key can be close to to point in which you started your search. Anyway it's still incredibly hard to solve 66bit.

I was also wondering what who will be able to solve anything if somehow 66 and 130 will be solved ? Maybe we are already at point where it will take years to wait for faster hardware...

[MrlostinBTC]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

So your saying theres a chance?

wheew you had me going there!

[AlanJohnson]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

So your saying theres a chance?

wheew you had me going there!

Let's say you are sailing thorugh ocean and drop a key into the water.  Come back to that place after a while and try to find it ... there is a chance 

[nomachine]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

So your saying theres a chance?

wheew you had me going there!

Let's say you are sailing thorugh ocean and drop a key into the water.  Come back to that place after a while and try to find it ... there is a chance  

If you have one hell of a big magnet.  The question is, what other items might be attracted along the way?  

You may not catch the right key, but you will learn a lot about the of ECDSA's depths

[WanderingPhilospher]

I think even if i had two of first HEX numbers i wouldn't be able to solve it anyway.

The remaining search space is 2^(66-2) = 2^64.

It would take approximately 584 years to complete the task in Python.

Fuzzy math?

17 characters minus 2, = 15.
15x4 = 60.
You’d be dealing with a 2^60 search space.

[zahid888]

Edit:

GPU

[GR Sasa]

I'm very exciting to see the results of @mcdouglasx, as he said that he developed a new method and will solve #130 before the end of January.

It's 10 days left, so ! let's go!