i  have constructed an explicit scalar d such that d⋅G=Q on secp256k1, where Q is the well‑known public key for the 12ib / 1A7k wallet, and MY d also satisfies a specific modular condition; this makes my work a concrete discrete‑logarithm solution for that particular point under my stated assumptions and factual data. HOWEVER for the skeptics it does not constitute public proof that this d is the historical private key actually used..BECAUSE i have not enacted a transaction for this as of yet... despite having the nonce and able to parse the preimages from 75% of spent txns which eludes to the fact of it being that key indeed. To compute d⋅G with the standard generator G and group order n, you recover exactly the public key Q above, and standard hashing/Base58Check from this Q yield the 12ib and 1A7k addresses. This is a concrete solution of the elliptic‑curve discrete logarithm problem for the specific point Q under secp256k1. Here is my statement of fact. Instead of deleitng my posts asking for help on the transaction... maybe it can be discussed instead.  Why should my request be frowned on when this has been allowed in past instances and mine is not on a active wallet or with any nefarious overtones. Its not like im releasing the method, i just want to finish it ... This is my statement on claim and ownership ... as i have not seen anyone come close to solving it and wont be able too. resolved months ago.. thank you. yes i do want help on the txn... as there are multiple issues most with concensus which has changed and other quarks that were not present then ... if your going to delete my post - then send me a pm stating why ... or are we just playing bias games as someone else solved it? ...
 i  have constructed an explicit scalar d such that d⋅G=Q on secp256k1, where Q is the well‑known public key for the 12ib / 1A7k wallet, and MY d also satisfies a specific modular condition; this makes my work a concrete discrete‑logarithm solution for that particular point under my stated assumptions and factual data. HOWEVER for the skeptics it does not constitute public proof that this d is the historical private key actually used..BECAUSE i have not enacted a transaction for this as of yet... despite having the nonce and able to parse the preimages from 75% of spent txns which eludes to the fact of it being that key indeed. To compute d⋅G with the standard generator G and group order n, you recover exactly the public key Q above, and standard hashing/Base58Check from this Q yield the 12ib and 1A7k addresses. This is a concrete solution of the elliptic‑curve discrete logarithm problem for the specific point Q under secp256k1. Here is my statement of fact. Instead of deleitng my posts asking for help on the transaction... maybe it can be discussed instead.  Why should my request be frowned on when this has been allowed in past instances and mine is not on a active wallet or with any nefarious overtones. Its not like im releasing the method, i just want to finish it ... This is my statement on claim and ownership ... as i have not seen anyone come close to solving it and wont be able too. resolved months ago.. thank you. yes i do want help on the txn... as there are multiple issues most with concensus which has changed and other quarks that were not present then ... if your going to delete my post - then send me a pm stating why ... or are we just playing bias games as someone else solved it? ...

 i  have constructed an explicit scalar d such that d⋅G=Q on secp256k1, where Q is the well‑known public key for the 12ib / 1A7k wallet, and MY d also satisfies a specific modular condition; this makes my work a concrete discrete‑logarithm solution for that particular point under my stated assumptions and factual data. HOWEVER for the skeptics it does not constitute public proof that this d is the historical private key actually used..BECAUSE i have not enacted a transaction for this as of yet... despite having the nonce and able to parse the preimages from 75% of spent txns which eludes to the fact of it being that key indeed. To compute d⋅G with the standard generator G and group order n, you recover exactly the public key Q above, and standard hashing/Base58Check from this Q yield the 12ib and 1A7k addresses. This is a concrete solution of the elliptic‑curve discrete logarithm problem for the specific point Q under secp256k1. Here is my statement of fact. Instead of deleitng my posts asking for help on the transaction... maybe it can be discussed instead.  Why should my request be frowned on when this has been allowed in past instances and mine is not on a active wallet or with any nefarious overtones. Its not like im releasing the method, i just want to finish it ... This is my statement on claim and ownership ... as i have not seen anyone come close to solving it and wont be able too. resolved months ago.. thank you. yes i do want help on the txn... as there are multiple issues most with concensus which has changed and other quarks that were not present then ... if your going to delete my post - then send me a pm stating why ... or are we just playing bias games as someone else solved it? ...

 i  have constructed an explicit scalar d such that d⋅G=Q on secp256k1, where Q is the well‑known public key for the 12ib / 1A7k wallet, and MY d also satisfies a specific modular condition; this makes my work a concrete discrete‑logarithm solution for that particular point under my stated assumptions and factual data. HOWEVER for the skeptics it does not constitute public proof that this d is the historical private key actually used..BECAUSE i have not enacted a transaction for this as of yet... despite having the nonce and able to parse the preimages from 75% of spent txns which eludes to the fact of it being that key indeed. To compute d⋅G with the standard generator G and group order n, you recover exactly the public key Q above, and standard hashing/Base58Check from this Q yield the 12ib and 1A7k addresses. This is a concrete solution of the elliptic‑curve discrete logarithm problem for the specific point Q under secp256k1. Here is my statement of fact. Instead of deleitng my posts asking for help on the transaction... maybe it can be discussed instead.  Why should my request be frowned on when this has been allowed in past instances and mine is not on a active wallet or with any nefarious overtones. Its not like im releasing the method, i just want to finish it ... This is my statement on claim and ownership ... as i have not seen anyone come close to solving it and wont be able too. resolved months ago.. thank you. yes i do want help on the txn... as there are multiple issues most with concensus which has changed and other quarks that were not present then ... if your going to delete my post - then send me a pm stating why ... or are we just playing bias games as someone else solved it? ...