Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[puzzle_72_worker]

I do not contest the way of working of BTC generation.
In my software i eliminated the 33 length(93% remaining).
I didn't reinvented the wheel, because each filter is coming with a cost of speed.
From those pictures that you see there, there are only few that can be found with B9jrG, and are on same location.
Coincidence?
Even the checksum of address cannot be found in each range if 44, this is random.

So from what i found the key is between 68-6f.
Push hard on bruteforce mates.

[eggsylacer]

I do not contest the way of working of BTC generation.
In my software i eliminated the 33 length(93% remaining).
I didn't reinvented the wheel, because each filter is coming with a cost of speed.
From those pictures that you see there, there are only few that can be found with B9jrG, and are on same location.
Coincidence?
Even the checksum of address cannot be found in each range if 44, this is random.

So from what i found the key is between 68-6f.
Push hard on bruteforce mates.

Using Kangaroo JeanLucPons, I checked the boundaries of the range from 2^139 to 2^139+2^91 and from 2^140-2^91 to 2^140 for the point 031f6a332d3c5c4f2de2378c012f429cd109ba07d69690c6c701b6bb87860d6640, the point is clearly not in these ranges. So, according to your logic, I have reduced the complexity of the task, you're welcome.

[puzzle_72_worker]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

[eggsylacer]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I’m telling you the same thing, but within the points on the curve.
Following your logic, the complexity of the search can be reduced by scanning the range. But you apparently don’t understand what complexity is.

[puzzle_72_worker]

Some of you got in this domain or subject but you have no ideea what you are doing here.
What i am saying and what you responde....
I gave the ideea, now if anybody know what i am saying, please check with real facts, if not good luck on your way loosing time and complicate things.

[detechs]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I’m telling you the same thing, but within the points on the curve.
Following your logic, the complexity of the search can be reduced by scanning the range. But you apparently don’t understand what complexity is.

How do you prove the key doesn't contain those filters without scanning them to double check?

[eggsylacer]

Some of you got in this domain or subject but you have no ideea what you are doing here.
What i am saying and what you responde....
I gave the ideea, now if anybody know what i am saying, please check with real facts, if not good luck on your way loosing time and complicate things.

That’s exactly it you don’t even know the definitions of the terms. What can you even talk about?
The fact that you simply “discarded” part of the keys does not mean that the computational complexity of the problem has decreased on its own. Since our problem has a condition that each key is in the range from 2^n to 2^(n+1) - 1, the complexity will accordingly be the same. Of course, I don’t deny the fact of “luck,” and you might just happen to get lucky with the key.

[Pac_Man]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I think you're missing something there. You say that excluding 34-digit addresses saves 7% of the time, but you don't say how you gain that 7%. Because when you're analyzing P2PKH keys, you're actually losing that 7%. By excluding those addresses, you'll only gain the time the code takes to verify the generated addresses with the target address already in memory, and you definitely won't gain any 7%. If, on the other hand, verifying the number of digits is the first condition of all the conditions you created, you'll only gain the time the code would take to go through all those conditions you created, but in any case, the entire process would have to be done by the code until you obtain the address that will be analyzed by all the filters you created. Honestly, I don't see any gain in that.

[eggsylacer]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I’m telling you the same thing, but within the points on the curve.
Following your logic, the complexity of the search can be reduced by scanning the range. But you apparently don’t understand what complexity is.

How do you prove the key doesn't contain those filters without scanning them to double check?

How can we prove that the key contains filters? As mentioned earlier, these are just random values. Before claiming that there are “hidden” patterns here, study how generators and pseudo‑randomness work in principle.

[CrabStick1]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I’m telling you the same thing, but within the points on the curve.
Following your logic, the complexity of the search can be reduced by scanning the range. But you apparently don’t understand what complexity is.

How do you prove the key doesn't contain those filters without scanning them to double check?

How can we prove that the key contains filters? As mentioned earlier, these are just random values. Before claiming that there are “hidden” patterns here, study how generators and pseudo‑randomness work in principle.

You are arguing with someone who said that the creator is a fan of iguanas animal and maybe he has one, and have 1-2 kids because has some children stories inside clues + freddy mercury fan.)))))

[puzzle_72_worker]

Nobody needs to argue with no one.
I gave you a math fact. If you cannot see behind the ideea or you cannot compute, this do not means is not existing. Don't you want to give you also the formula and result of this?
Let's be serious...
By generating only 34 length, you will see something interesting on how this BTC addresses are generated and how the hex keys compute.
I gave you an ideea, the rest is cancan...do what you want with this info. I do not care about haters...if anyone who tried this and saw howis built, will understand, the rest will see this as garbage...
feel free to use softwares that others built instead to build your own formulas and softwares...

[eggsylacer]

This is not my logic, is a math fact..
Scan any range you want sequential and see what i am talking about.
Using kangaroo you cannot see the Address...only public key.
Use a vanity and scan a /30 full and store local, after that do a statistic to see how many have 33 and 34... You will see aprox 93% of 34 length.
You exclude those from generation and you won 7% time.
Adding more exclusions like 4 identical letters or numbers in first 7 hex and much more conditions, and you gain up to 40%

I’m telling you the same thing, but within the points on the curve.
Following your logic, the complexity of the search can be reduced by scanning the range. But you apparently don’t understand what complexity is.

How do you prove the key doesn't contain those filters without scanning them to double check?

How can we prove that the key contains filters? As mentioned earlier, these are just random values. Before claiming that there are “hidden” patterns here, study how generators and pseudo‑randomness work in principle.

You are arguing with someone who said that the creator is a fan of iguanas animal and maybe he has one, and have 1-2 kids because has some children stories inside clues + freddy mercury fan.)))))

I completely agree, it’s like talking to a wall.

Nobody needs to argue with no one.
I gave you a math fact. If you cannot see behind the ideea or you cannot compute, this do not means is not existing. Don't you want to give you also the formula and result of this?
Let's be serious...
By generating only 34 length, you will see something interesting on how this BTC addresses are generated and how the hex keys compute.
I gave you an ideea, the rest is cancan...do what you want with this info. I do not care about haters...if anyone who tried this and saw howis built, will understand, the rest will see this as garbage...
feel free to use softwares that others built instead to build your own formulas and softwares...

Under no circumstances should you run unverified programs, and always check them for viruses on dedicated websites.

[mjojo]

~

As a reminder Gx of secp256k1 is also a valid point on secQ256k1, maybe it would be better for the author to use that curve and generate Qs of puzzle exposed Qs and somehow share them. Let's try breaking the ECC before the machines do it for us.

Gx     = 53718550993811904772965658690407829053653678808745171666022356150019200052646

the same x point of N/2 in secp256k1 and secq256k1
N/2,x = 86918276961810349294276103416548851884759982251107

how many you found the same x point on both curve?

[eggsylacer]

~

As a reminder Gx of secp256k1 is also a valid point on secQ256k1, maybe it would be better for the author to use that curve and generate Qs of puzzle exposed Qs and somehow share them. Let's try breaking the ECC before the machines do it for us.

Gx     = 53718550993811904772965658690407829053653678808745171666022356150019200052646

the same x point of N/2 in secp256k1 and secq256k1
N/2,x = 86918276961810349294276103416548851884759982251107

how many you found the same x point on both curve?

There is no division on the curve; only addition and multiplication based on addition.

[brainless]

Cyclone app with function f for load list ranges works on cpu, any other app for gpu ?

[fecell]

There is no division on the curve; only addition and multiplication based on addition.

U R complety wrong.
https://chat.deepseek.com/share/rg6vz4jzt870wd3jj8
it's a usual operation.

[andyfibe]

~

As a reminder Gx of secp256k1 is also a valid point on secQ256k1, maybe it would be better for the author to use that curve and generate Qs of puzzle exposed Qs and somehow share them. Let's try breaking the ECC before the machines do it for us.

Gx     = 53718550993811904772965658690407829053653678808745171666022356150019200052646

the same x point of N/2 in secp256k1 and secq256k1
N/2,x = 86918276961810349294276103416548851884759982251107

how many you found the same x point on both curve?

There is no division on the curve; only addition and multiplication based on addition.

Spot on about addition and multiplication Even though there's no real division on the curve, multiplying by the inverse scalar ($k^{-1}$) pretty much do the same job

[fecell]

multiplying by the inverse scalar (...) pretty much do the same job

exactly!

[eggsylacer]

There is no division on the curve; only addition and multiplication based on addition.

U R complety wrong.
https://chat.deepseek.com/share/rg6vz4jzt870wd3jj8
it's a usual operation.

It says right in the text "multiplying Q by the modular multiplicative inverse of a modulo n". You don't even understand what you're reading, lol...
if there was a division operation on the curve, then the curve would have been hacked long ago...
That is, there would be no discrete logarithm problem.

[puzzle_72_worker]

@eggsylacer as i was saying to others, are you a PHD, double PHD or nobel prize winner?
That's the problem, here o forum who is arguing have no ideea about the crypto domain...you follow like sheeps the software built of others, use AI and you think that all the things AI is giving you is perfect...
30 years ago you had no chance to go in a domain similar to this one, and now using AI in 2-3 minutes you think you are GOD...
If anyone is smart enough, built your own algorithm, own softwares and don't give advices to others if you cannot prove your real world identity or what study, academic or Nobel Prize....
Give it a break...this forum is letting anyone who can use AI thinking and comporting like Einstein....
If you cannot prove that, or invest  at least 1.000.000Euro in research, you are just a child with a laptop that use AI and think he is a hacker....
Also using multiple accounts from fake email addresses....

This is reality...