mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Conjectures 'R Us (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=81)
-   -   Report top-5000 primes here (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=9782)

 gd_barnes 2007-12-24 03:34

Report top-5000 primes here

Instructions for submitting a top-5000 prime:

Step 1: For people who have not submitted top-5000 primes previously, create a prover account:
1. Go to [URL]https://primes.utm.edu/bios/newprover.php[/URL].
2. Fill out the form and submit it. You will be assigned a prover account.

Step 2: Create a proof code:
1. Go to [URL]https://primes.utm.edu/bios/newcode.php[/URL].
2. Type in your name that you created in step 1 in the space provided.
3. In the list of proof programs, select the program that you used to PROVE the prime (not a probable prime). Usually it will be Jean Penne's LLR or OpenPFGW.
4. In the space below all of the proof programs that says "none", type in 'CRUS' for the project, your sieving software (srsieve for team drives), and other software that helped find the prime. Separate each selection by a comma. (Note if you used LLR to find a probable prime and then PFGW to prove the prime, select OpenPFGW in the selection list and then type in LLR as additional software at the bottom. Each program will get full credit.)
5. You should now have a new proof code and can submit the prime. Example...L442.

Step 3: Submit the prime:
1. Go to [URL]https://primes.utm.edu/bios/index.php[/URL].
2. Next to 'search for proof-code', type your new code from step 2 and press enter.
3. Towards the bottom, next to 'Submit primes using this code as', click on your name (prover account) and press enter.
4. You should see a big free-form box. Type in your prime (no spaces needed) and click 'Press here to submit these prime(s)'.
5. If necessary in the little pop-up box, type in your user name (prover account) and password and press enter.
6. A verification screen will come up. If the prime is correct, click 'Press here to complete submission'.

Suggestion: I suggest attempting to "normalize" or "reduce" your prime as much as possible before submitting although it is not necessary. The top-5000 site will do this automatically with its 'canonization' process but it will give you a strange message that is difficult to comprehend. A normalization or reduction can be done all of the time if the base is a power of 2 or the k-value is a multiple of the base after reducing the base as much as possible. Example:
13438*16^98815+1
13438*2^395260+1
6719*2^395261+1

Gary

 rogue 2008-03-26 21:36

288*13^109217-1 is prime!!!

This proves that 302 is the lowest Riesel k for base 13.

BTW, it was found with Phil Carmody's phrot program on PPC and proved with PFGW.

 gd_barnes 2008-03-26 22:17

[quote=rogue;129879]288*13^109217-1 is prime!!!

This proves that 302 is the lowest Riesel k for base 13.

BTW, it was found with Phil Carmody's phrot program on PPC and proved with PFGW.[/quote]

:george::george::george::george:

This is HUGE!! Way to go!! Our first full proof of a conjecture since we started the project! And our first top-5000 prime that is not a power of 2!

I'll post it in the news and quickly update the web pages.

Edit: Rogue, can you have Prof. Caldwell add the CRUS project to your prover code? Thanks.

Gary

 rogue 2008-03-27 01:07

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;129888]
Edit: Rogue, can you have Prof. Caldwell add the CRUS project to your prover code? Thanks.[/QUOTE]

Done

 Jean Penné 2008-03-27 07:45

Riesel base 2 odd n's : k = 86613 eliminated!

Happy days for Conjectures'Rus project!
Congratulations to Mark for the first conjecture demonstrated!!

This morning, I found also a success :

173226*2^356966-1 is prime! Time : 520.420 sec.

So, k = 86613 is eliminated, and 15 k's are remaining for proving the Liskovets-Gallot conjecure for Riesel odd n's!

This is also a top 5000 prime, so I am waiting for a project code.

Reseving now k = 290514 in place of this died k!

Regards,
Jean

 gd_barnes 2008-03-27 08:07

[quote=Jean Penné;129953]Happy days for Conjectures'Rus project!
Congratulations to Mark for the first conjecture demonstrated!!

This morning, I found also a success :

173226*2^356966-1 is prime! Time : 520.420 sec.

So, k = 86613 is eliminated, and 15 k's are remaining for proving the Liskovets-Gallot conjecure for Riesel odd n's!

This is also a top 5000 prime, so I am waiting for a project code.

Reseving now k = 290514 in place of this died k!

Regards,
Jean[/quote]

Congrats Jean! It's nice to get a couple of top-5000 primes for the project after a lull for a little while. That's also the first one for the Liskovets-Gallot conjecures for our project. The remaining 7 k's on the Sierp odd-n are being stubborn now with no primes since n=~299K. Testing is now past n=460K on all k's.

The project code is CRUS.

Gary

 gd_barnes 2008-03-31 06:09

FINALLY...Sierp base 2 odd-n gets one!

After a LONG lull between primes on Sierp base 2 odd-n:

80463*2^468141+1 is prime!

Now at n=471K on all k's.

6 k's to go!

 Jean Penné 2008-03-31 13:45

Very nice results!

Many congrats, Gary and Karsten, for these last three primes, there are very nice results, because 1 k is eliminated for Sierpinski base 2 odd n's and 2 k's are eliminated for Riesel base 2 odd n's.

Moreover, the big sievings I started for these two sub-projects will become a lot faster!

Please, Karsten would you credit yourself, (instead of me) for the two primes you discovered!

Best Regards,
Jean

 Jean Penné 2008-04-07 14:26

Riesel Base 2 odd n's

As reported in another thread :
145257*2^443077-1 is prime! Time : 856.416 sec.

Now 11 k's are remaining, and still another top 5000 prime for the project!

k = 148323 is now at n = 508511, no prime, continuing...

Regards,
Jean

 gd_barnes 2008-04-07 16:16

[quote=Jean Penné;130989]145257*2^443077-1 is prime! Time : 856.416 sec.

Now 11 k's are remaining, and still another top 5000 prime for the project!

Regards,
Jean[/quote]

Great work Jean!

We're now making nice progress on the Riesel even-n and odd-n conjectures.

I should be at n=500K on Sierp odd-n by mid-week.

Gary

 mdettweiler 2008-04-30 04:06

[quote=gd_barnes;121374]7. In the space below all the programs, type in 'CRUS' for the project, your sieving software (srsieve for team drives), and other software that helped find the prime. Separate each selections by a comma. (Note if you used LLR to find a probable prime and then PFGW to prove the prime, select OpenPFGW at the top and then type in LLR as additional software at the bottom. Each program will get half credit.)[/quote]
I just noticed this part in the first post of this thread, where it instructs users to credit their primes as LLR and PFGW for top-5000 primes on a non-power-of-2 base. Actually, because LLR's code for non-k*2^n+-1 numbers is taken directly from PRP, users should enter "PRP" under additional software, not LLR, if LLR only found a probable prime. In fact, LLR will instruct users to do so with a note in the lresults.txt file--it will say "such-and-such is a probable prime. Please credit George Woltman's PRP for this result!". Also, according to the top-5000 site, when you list multiple programs in a prover-code, they all get full credit, not half credit as this thread says--this is done to encourage reporting of all programs involved.

So, I fixed it just now to reflect this--hope nobody minds. :smile:

 rogue 2008-04-30 12:34

[QUOTE=Anonymous;132422]I just noticed this part in the first post of this thread, where it instructs users to credit their primes as LLR and PFGW for top-5000 primes on a non-power-of-2 base. Actually, because LLR's code for non-k*2^n+-1 numbers is taken directly from PRP, users should enter "PRP" under additional software, not LLR, if LLR only found a probable prime. In fact, LLR will instruct users to do so with a note in the lresults.txt file--it will say "such-and-such is a probable prime. Please credit George Woltman's PRP for this result!". Also, according to the top-5000 site, when you list multiple programs in a prover-code, they all get full credit, not half credit as this thread says--this is done to encourage reporting of all programs involved.[/QUOTE]

IIRC, there was a similar discussion a while ago in the SR5 project. It came down to the point of whether or not you used LLR or PRP to do the test. Even if they share the same code, all you need to do is credit the program(s) you used. There are a number of fuzzy lines when you start going down this path. There will be a desire to credit anyone's code that was involved. One example would be GMP, which is used by PFGW or pieces of code used by George's FFT library that was borrowed from other sources. Then you can start talking about giving people credit for writing the code and the testers, etc. IMO, limit the prover codes to the applications used to find the prime.

 mdettweiler 2008-04-30 15:08

[quote=rogue;132440]IIRC, there was a similar discussion a while ago in the SR5 project. It came down to the point of whether or not you used LLR or PRP to do the test. Even if they share the same code, all you need to do is credit the program(s) you used. There are a number of fuzzy lines when you start going down this path. There will be a desire to credit anyone's code that was involved. One example would be GMP, which is used by PFGW or pieces of code used by George's FFT library that was borrowed from other sources. Then you can start talking about giving people credit for writing the code and the testers, etc. IMO, limit the prover codes to the applications used to find the prime.[/quote]
But, the LLR application even tells says in the results file "Please credit George Woltman's PRP for this result"--seemed pretty clear to me.

Maybe we should ask Jean Penne how he prefers to have them reported?

 michaf 2008-04-30 15:35

Riesel base 31

Finally, a long due result for Riesel base 31:

131994*31^68109-1 is prime! :smile:

After a 2 months wait, it's a rather satisfying top 5000 prime too! :flex:

This leaves 9 k's for Riesel base 31.

 rogue 2008-04-30 17:09

[QUOTE=Anonymous;132450]But, the LLR application even tells says in the results file "Please credit George Woltman's PRP for this result"--seemed pretty clear to me.

Maybe we should ask Jean Penne how he prefers to have them reported?[/QUOTE]

I don't believe that Jean cares, but I won't speak for him.

 mdettweiler 2008-04-30 17:14

[quote=rogue;132464]I don't believe that Jean cares, but I won't speak for him.[/quote]

 gd_barnes 2008-05-02 22:19

Interesting discussion here.

I have to lean towards what Rogue suggested despite the message in Jean's LLR program. I believe the message was put there not thinking of the ramifications of a single program pulling code from multiple sources, which as Rogue implies, gets into a very slippery slope of crediting any # of contributing programs or testers.

I was not aware that each program gets full credit if more than one is used. Thanks for correcting that Anon.

I was aware of the display in Jean's program but had chosen to ignore it for the same 'slippery slope' reason.

If it comes back that PRP should be credited, I'll create a new proof code if I find a non-power-of-2 top-5000 prime. Fortunately I haven't found a non-power-of-2 top-5000 prime yet or I'd be stuck with a messy situation of moving some of them over to a new proof code, which perhaps isn't too messy for Prof. Caldwell to move a few primes over to.

Gary

 gd_barnes 2008-05-23 01:52

BANG!!

Ba da bing...ba da boom...

The odd-n conjectures finally hit pay dirt on the Riesel side and knock a k-value out of 3 different bases...

6927*2^743481-1 is prime!!:george::george:

This also slays k=13854 for Riesel base 4 and 16. Primes for those reported in the main prime thread.

Gary

 gd_barnes 2008-05-23 02:02

There is now one less k-value remaining for Riesel base 4 and 16:

13854*4^371740-1 is prime
-and-
13854*16^185870-1 is prime

submitted as:
6927*2^743481-1

Base 19 prime

Hidiho,

I've been taking some of my k's to much higher n's then I usually do. With success:

8216*19^91041-1 is prime!

The only base 19 prime in the top 5000.

Having fun, Willem.

 Jean Penné 2008-05-24 15:54

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;134050]Ba da bing...ba da boom...

The odd-n conjectures finally hit pay dirt on the Riesel side and knock a k-value out of 3 different bases...

6927*2^743481-1 is prime!!:george::george:

This also slays k=13854 for Riesel base 4 and 16. Primes for those reported in the main prime thread.

Gary[/QUOTE]

Very nice result, Gary!
Jean

 Xentar 2008-06-12 07:25

Just saw this one in the log file:
160*17^166048+1 is a probable prime. Time: 4811.857 sec.

Place 604 :)
[url]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85139[/url]

only 2 more for sierp b17

 gd_barnes 2008-06-14 19:16

[quote=Xentar;135735]Just saw this one in the log file:
160*17^166048+1 is a probable prime. Time: 4811.857 sec.

Place 604 :)
[URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85139[/URL]

only 2 more for sierp b17[/quote]

A HUGE congrats on a HUGE prime Xentar!! :smile:

It's great to see all the different-base primes making the top-5000.

Gary

 Xentar 2008-06-30 16:45

WOOOHOO, birthday prime, found yesterday :)

262*17^186768+1 is a probable prime. Time: 7393.195 sec.
[url]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85256[/url]

only one more to go!

 gd_barnes 2008-06-30 19:50

[quote=Xentar;137014]WOOOHOO, birthday prime, found yesterday :)

262*17^186768+1 is a probable prime. Time: 7393.195 sec.
[URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85256[/URL]

only one more to go![/quote]

:george::george::george:

OH YEAH!! A harty congrats from all at CRUS! We'll have to call you the base 17 slayer! :smile:

That's remarkable to find two primes so close together for such a high base at such a high n-range!

Gary

[QUOTE=Xentar;137014]WOOOHOO, birthday prime, found yesterday :)

262*17^186768+1 is a probable prime. Time: 7393.195 sec.
[url]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85256[/url]

only one more to go![/QUOTE]

Happy!

 KEP 2008-07-04 13:55

Congrats on the Base 17 Xentar, and to you too Gary on your 2 Base 256 primes...

KEP!

 michaf 2008-07-25 17:29

Finally, after more then 2 month waiting:

74924*31^81381-1 is prime!

(121374 digits, around nr. 2725 in the top5000)

This now leaves only 8 k's to go for riesel base 31.

 gd_barnes 2008-07-25 18:37

[quote=michaf;138345]Finally, after more then 2 month waiting:

74924*31^81381-1 is prime!

(121374 digits, around nr. 2725 in the top5000)

This now leaves only 8 k's to go for riesel base 31.[/quote]

Congrats on an excellent find Micha! :smile:

 gd_barnes 2008-11-13 10:58

After a very long dry spell for the 40 k's remaining on Riesel base 256, it finally scores its first top-5000 prime:

7179*256^66585-1 is prime

submitted as:
7179*2^532680-1

All k's on Riesel base 256 are at n=67K; still going to n=75K.

:smile: Gary

 kar_bon 2008-11-17 10:46

for the Liskovets-Gallot conjectures:

Riesel odd n:
106377*2^475569-1 is prime

9 to go!

 kar_bon 2008-12-03 13:00

Liskovets-Gallot: Riesel odd

30003*2^613463-1 is prime!

prime riesel base 48

Bingo!

7127*48^78407-1 is prime with 131825 digits. It comes in at place 2505 in the top 5000 list. I still need 5 more primes to prove the conjecture for prime riesel conjecture for base 48, so chances are that proving it is out of reach for now.

Cheers, Willem.

 michaf 2008-12-10 20:41

Well.... they MIGHT be at 79,80,81,82 and 83k respectively...
I MIGHT be off by some amount too...

Don't give up :)

 gd_barnes 2008-12-11 02:50

7127*48^78407-1 is prime with 131825 digits. It comes in at place 2505 in the top 5000 list. I still need 5 more primes to prove the conjecture for prime riesel conjecture for base 48, so chances are that proving it is out of reach for now.

Cheers, Willem.[/quote]

Congrats on a large prime Willem!

 gd_barnes 2008-12-11 07:10

7127*48^78407-1 is prime with 131825 digits. It comes in at place 2505 in the top 5000 list. I still need 5 more primes to prove the conjecture for prime riesel conjecture for base 48, so chances are that proving it is out of reach for now.

Cheers, Willem.[/quote]

Willem,

Even though you stated it, it took me a while to figure out that you were actually working on the "prime" riesel conjecture for this base. At first, I thought you had the wrong base.

Unfortunately I won't be able to show the prime on the web pages as they currently exist since the "regular" conjecture is only k=3226.

At some point, I'll create separate pages for the prime conjectures and make them a sub-project. Of course I'll show the prime at that point.

Gary

 mdettweiler 2008-12-11 16:20

[quote=gd_barnes;152852]Willem,

Even though you stated it, it took me a while to figure out that you were actually working on the "prime" riesel conjecture for this base. At first, I thought you had the wrong base.

Unfortunately I won't be able to show the prime on the web pages as they currently exist since the "regular" conjecture is only k=3226.

At some point, I'll create separate pages for the prime conjectures and make them a sub-project. Of course I'll show the prime at that point.

Gary[/quote]
Maybe in the meantime, we could keep track of the "prime" conjectures in a table inside a dedicated thread?

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;152924]Maybe in the meantime, we could keep track of the "prime" conjectures in a table inside a dedicated thread?[/QUOTE]

The easiest would be to drop my excel somewhere on Gary's website, coupled with a link from the main page. Add a note to it that this is the Dec 1 version and ready for now.
I'll start on double checking at some point, when that is done I'll post the latest version.

Willem.

 mdettweiler 2008-12-15 02:20

Found a nice big juicy one for Sierp. base 23!:

8*23^119215+1 is prime! :banana:

This is also my first top-5000 prime for a non-power-of-2 base. :grin:

 gd_barnes 2008-12-15 02:43

[quote=mdettweiler;153360]Found a nice big juicy one for Sierp. base 23!:

8*23^119215+1 is prime! :banana:

This is also my first top-5000 prime for a non-power-of-2 base. :grin:[/quote]

Outstanding!! :smile: I don't have a single top-5000 prime on a non-power-of-2 base yet. Nice work!

This now becomes one of an amazing 7 bases <= 32 on the Sierp side that only have ONE k remaining! Those last k's are about as stubborn as they come. All except your k=68 have been searched to at least n=195K.

Gary

 gd_barnes 2008-12-15 02:49

[quote=mdettweiler;152924]Maybe in the meantime, we could keep track of the "prime" conjectures in a table inside a dedicated thread?[/quote]

Be my guest. I have all that I can handle now, especially since KEP gave up the Riesel base 3 conjecture. I still haven't reviewed the recent efforts on it to include them in my pages yet.

Gary

 MrOzzy 2008-12-15 07:18

[quote=gd_barnes;153364]Outstanding!! :smile: I don't have a single top-5000 prime on a non-power-of-2 base yet. Nice work!

This now becomes one of an amazing 7 bases <= 32 on the Sierp side that only have ONE k remaining! Those last k's are about as stubborn as they come. All except your k=68 have been searched to at least n=195K.

Gary[/quote]

I don't know how the people who reserved them feel about it, but what about combining all these bases and k into a single big sieve with afterwards a big drive for it to take them all to n= 1 million or so? (using llrnet for example)
The chance one of the bases gets proven is rather high if you do it this way ...

 mdettweiler 2008-12-15 07:24

[quote=MrOzzy;153390]I don't know how the people who reserved them feel about it, but what about combining all these bases and k into a single big sieve with afterwards a big drive for it to take them all to n= 1 million or so? (using llrnet for example)
The chance one of the bases gets proven is rather high if you do it this way ...[/quote]
Well, LLRnet doesn't work with multiple different bases/types at once, so we'd still have to use separate servers for each base. Probably the best way would be to hold team drives on each base in turn, and then when one is proven, move on to the next.

 gd_barnes 2008-12-15 07:35

[quote=MrOzzy;153390]I don't know how the people who reserved them feel about it, but what about combining all these bases and k into a single big sieve with afterwards a big drive for it to take them all to n= 1 million or so? (using llrnet for example)
The chance one of the bases gets proven is rather high if you do it this way ...[/quote]

It's interesting that you mention that. I recently have been having visions :smile: of running CRUS a little like NPLB in some respects.

This could actually be done but we wouldn't want to do it with LLRnet because Phrot is likely 30-50% faster than LLR and as Max said, LLRnet can't handle more than one base at a time.

What we would have to do is create a big ABC file with multiples bases in it that can be fed into either PFGW or Phrot. That way, many bases could be tested at once.

That said, the specific bases are at such widely varying test depths, ranging from n=100K to 400K that we couldn't really do it to prove these particular conjectures per se until we evened them out a little more, which would take quite a while. But we COULD do such a thing on k's for mutliple bases in whatever other manner that we choose as a team effort. Perhaps both base 19's at once since they are both at n=25K. Or several of the bases > 32 that are currently at n=10K all at once.

All of that said, due to many things going on at NPLB at the moment, I wouldn't want to coordinate such an effort for several months yet.

Before embarking on such an endeavor though, what we really need to do is have a major team discussion about some goals for CRUS. We don't really have any other than the little "mini-goal" that I made to get all of our powers-of-2 bases up to n=600K base 2 by year end. Right now, we're just kind of searching willy-nilly here-and-there because us admins (namely this one) haven't really had the time to put some direction to the project.

Gary

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;153392]Well, LLRnet doesn't work with multiple different bases/types at once, so we'd still have to use separate servers for each base. Probably the best way would be to hold team drives on each base in turn, and then when one is proven, move on to the next.[/QUOTE]

And how many drives are open at the moment?

Willem.

 mdettweiler 2008-12-15 21:17

[quote=Siemelink;153485]And how many drives are open at the moment?

Willem.[/quote]
Currently 3 "regular" drives (for Riesel base 16, Sierp. base 16, and Sierp. base 6, respectively), and two "mini" drives (Sierp. base 3 and Riesel base 3).

P.S.: We've currently got an LLRnet server running for Drive 3 (Sierp. base 6), at crus.ironbits.net port 6. Recently that server has been completely idle; we could always use some help there. :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2008-12-23 12:10

Riesel Base 45

1264*45^64666-1 is prime

Primality testing 1264*45^64666-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 7, base 1+sqrt(7)
1264*45^64666-1 is prime! (3830.0576s+0.0099s)

106910 digits and enters Top5000 at 4686 (just barely)

 gd_barnes 2008-12-24 04:19

[quote=MyDogBuster;154713]Riesel Base 45

1264*45^64666-1 is prime

Primality testing 1264*45^64666-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 7, base 1+sqrt(7)
1264*45^64666-1 is prime! (3830.0576s+0.0099s)

106910 digits and enters Top5000 at 4686 (just barely)[/quote]

Unbelievable! OK, how'd you do that? You're starting to scare me a little. Have you solved the mystery of where primes will be? lol

Well...actually, I was wondering how you were searching base 45. Unless you put a whole bunch of firepower on it, you couldn't be at n=65K on all of the k's yet starting from just n=10K.

Anyway, congrats on something that I don't have yet...a non-power-of-2 top-5000 prime! :smile:

Gary

 gd_barnes 2008-12-24 04:56

[quote=MyDogBuster;154713]Riesel Base 45

1264*45^64666-1 is prime

Primality testing 1264*45^64666-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 7, base 1+sqrt(7)
1264*45^64666-1 is prime! (3830.0576s+0.0099s)

106910 digits and enters Top5000 at 4686 (just barely)[/quote]

A couple of things on your prover code:

1. LLR cannot prove a non-power-of-2 base prime. If you tested it using LLR, then, yes, you should have LLR in the prover code but you also need to add "OpenPFGW". (I'm assuming you used PFGW to prove it.)

2. I thought you were going to search with Phrot since it is much faster. If you did, then LLR would need to be changed to "3Ps" in your prover code. Once again, it cannot prove a non-power-of-2 base prime so like in #1, you'd need to add "OpenPFGW".

For an example where Max found a base 23 top-5000 prime using Phrot, see his prover code p238.

If this was an isolated prime that you just happened to find, I'd say don't worry about it. But since you'll likely find several top-5000 primes for all of the base 45 k's (or base 6 or some other base), I'd suggest Emailing Prof. Caldwell and having him make one or both of the changes above.

If you searched using Phrot, my guess is that he will ask you to create a new prover code and then will move your prime to it since LLR prover codes start with an "L" and Phrot codes start apparently start with a "p". Eventually your code L669 would be deleted by their system after it doesn't have any primes for a period of time. Alternatively, if you searched with LLR, then I'm sure he'd just add OpenPFGW to L669.

Gary

 mdettweiler 2008-12-24 05:17

[quote=gd_barnes;154831]A couple of things on your prover code:

1. LLR cannot prove a non-power-of-2 base prime. If you tested it using LLR, then, yes, you should have LLR in the prover code but you also need to add "OpenPFGW". (I'm assuming you used PFGW to prove it.)

2. I thought you were going to search with Phrot since it is much faster. If you did, then LLR would need to be changed to "3Ps" in your prover code. Once again, it cannot prove a non-power-of-2 base prime so like in #1, you'd need to add "OpenPFGW".

For an example where Max found a base 23 top-5000 prime using Phrot, see his prover code p238.

If this was an isolated prime that you just happened to find, I'd say don't worry about it. But since you'll likely find several top-5000 primes for all of the base 45 k's (or base 6 or some other base), I'd suggest Emailing Prof. Caldwell and having him make one or both of the changes above.

If you searched using Phrot, my guess is that he will ask you to create a new prover code and then will move your prime to it since LLR prover codes start with an "L" and Phrot codes start apparently start with a "p". Eventually your code L669 would be deleted by their system after it doesn't have any primes for a period of time. Alternatively, if you searched with LLR, then I'm sure he'd just add OpenPFGW to L669.

Gary[/quote]
Actually, the whole thing with the codes starting with "L" or "p" doesn't have anything to do with LLR vs. Phrot; instead, it has to do entirely with the program that *proved* the prime. That's why you have to select the proof program separately from the "additional credits" when creating a prover code. For example: if you select LLR as the proof program (i.e. for base 2 stuff or power-of-2 bases), the code will begin with L. However, if you select OpenPFGW as the proof program, the code will begin with "p".

Max :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2008-12-24 07:05

[quote]Unbelievable! OK, how'd you do that? You're starting to scare me a little. Have you solved the mystery of where primes will be? lol

Well...actually, I was wondering how you were searching base 45. Unless you put a whole bunch of firepower on it, you couldn't be at n=65K on all of the k's yet starting from just n=10K.
[/quote]

I'm really using ESP. LMAO.

I'm searching individual k's to 100K. I sieved all the k's from n=10K-500K up to 10T max. Now I'm using the individual k files to phrot to 100K. I have 4 cores banging away. I didn't like the idea of doing all the k's at once to 100K.

[quote]2. I thought you were going to search with Phrot since it is much faster. If you did, then LLR would need to be changed to "3Ps" in your prover code. Once again, it cannot prove a non-power-of-2 base prime so like in #1, you'd need to add "OpenPFGW".

[/quote]

I'll get the prover code fixed. I couldn't find phrot anywhere in the list.
At least I got the srsieve, CRUS and my name right. 3 outta 4 ain't bad for an older guy. lol

 mdettweiler 2008-12-24 07:17

[quote=MyDogBuster;154841]I'm really using ESP. LMAO.

I'm searching individual k's to 100K. I sieved all the k's from n=10K-500K up to 10T max. Now I'm using the individual k files to phrot to 100K. I have 4 cores banging away. I didn't like the idea of doing all the k's at once to 100K. [/quote]
Yeah, I generally like to do the same thing with non-team drive stuff here at CRUS--that way I can make use of Phrot's -s command line flag, which tells it to stop searching its input file as soon as it finds a PRP. That way, I can queue up additional work with a shell script (actually, I do it all on the command line, but it's essentially like a shell script, I won't go into it all here), and thus ensure that I never have an idle or wasted moment. :grin:
[quote]I'll get the prover code fixed. I couldn't find phrot anywhere in the list.
At least I got the srsieve, CRUS and my name right. 3 outta 4 ain't bad for an older guy. lol[/quote]
The reason why you couldn't find Phrot in the list is because it's not the proof program, just a PRP-finding program; PFGW (listed as OpenPFGW on the Prime Pages website) would be the correct choice in this case since you're using that to prove the primes after finding them PRP with Phrot. Instead, you enter Phrot in the "additional credits" farther down the page, like you do with sieving programs. Essentially, the create-prover-code page should look like this:

Proof software: OpenPFGW

(Note: 3Ps is the code for Phrot. The reason why it's called this instead of just Phrot is because Phil, the guy who made Phrot, figured it would be simpler to combine it into one prover code along with two other lesser-known prime-finding programs that he's made. I think it stands for "Phil's Prime Pack" or something like that. :smile:)

 MyDogBuster 2008-12-24 07:23

[QUOTE]The reason why you couldn't find Phrot in the list is because it's not the proof program, just a PRP-finding program; PFGW (listed as OpenPFGW on the Prime Pages website) would be the correct choice in this case since you're using that to prove the primes after finding them PRP with Phrot. Instead, you enter Phrot in the "additional credits" farther down the page, like you do with sieving programs. Essentially, the create-prover-code page should look like this:

Proof software: OpenPFGW

[/QUOTE]

I've emailed Dr. Caldwell to see about getting it fixed. I guess next time I should ask first.

 mdettweiler 2008-12-24 07:25

[quote=MyDogBuster;154844]I've emailed Dr. Caldwell to see about getting it fixed. I guess next time I should ask first.[/quote]
Okay, glad to hear that it's getting fixed. And, don't feel bad about it--messing up in some way when reporting primes is a very, very common mistake and has probably happened to at least 75% of us here at some point. :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2008-12-24 07:31

[QUOTE] but it's essentially like a shell script, I won't go into it all here), and thus ensure that I never have an idle or wasted moment. :grin:
[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see you shell script if I could. I did use the -s option but haven't quite figured out how to que up work behind it yet.

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;154845]Okay, glad to hear that it's getting fixed. And, don't feel bad about it--messing up in some way when reporting primes is a very, very common mistake and has probably happened to at least 75% of us here at some point. :smile:[/QUOTE]

Guilty!

 mdettweiler 2008-12-24 19:02

[quote=MyDogBuster;154846]I'd like to see you shell script if I could. I did use the -s option but haven't quite figured out how to que up work behind it yet.[/quote]
Okay, essentially what I'm doing is queuing up stuff like this in a shell script:

[I]#!/bin/sh
./phrot.p3-linux -b=3 -o -s totest.txt
cd ../../mprime
./mprime -d[/I]

What this does is run my Phrot executable on the file totest.txt, with the stop-on-PRP option enabled, so that it will exit on three conditions: 1) a Ctrl-C or other such shutdown signal; 2) it finds a PRP; or 3) it reaches the end of the totest.txt file.

After doing this, it executes the "cd ../../mprime" command to change to my mprime directory, and then run the mprime program. (mprime is the Linux version of Prime95, used by GIMPS, another prime search project; since their system is somewhat automated and has a large variety of work types to choose from, it makes a great choice for filler work like this if I don't have anything else hanging around to switch to :smile:).

Note that the commands to start mprime in my example can be replaced with whatever else you'd like to start. Sometimes, if, say, I have an NPLB manual file sitting around, I'll have it switch to my LLR directory and start that instead. Or, sometimes I'll have it start an LLRnet client.

Another thing you can do is queue up multiple different files for Phrot to test, say, one k after another if you're doing multiple k's. This works best if your multiple files are in separate directories, i.e. with completely separated Phrot installations, and also if your computer is running 24/7. :smile: (It will still work OK if your computer has to be rebooted, though it can get a little more confusing. However, having the different files set up with different Phrot installations helps a bit with this.)

The shell script for that would work like this:
[I]#!/bin/sh
./phrot.p3-linux -b=3 -o -s riesel45-24.txt
cd ../phrot2
./phrot.p3-linux -b=3 -o -s riesel45-372.txt
cd ../phrot3
./phrot.p3-linux -b=3 -o -s riesel45-1264.txt[/I]

...and et cetera, for all the k's you'd like to test on that computer.

Note that the above instructions are designed for Linux; on Windows the process is slightly different. Namely, you'd be using a batch file instead of a shell script, which means that, first of all, it has to have an extension of .bat or .cmd; you don't put the #!/bin/sh line at the top of the file; and you won't need to put "./" things in front of your Phrot commands. :smile:

Bonus tip for Linux only: how to string up commands without needing an actual shell script file. :grin: Bash, the Linux command line interpreter, has many handy-dandy shell script features--many of which work just as well on the command line as in a pre-written shell script. :smile: One of these is to put semicolons between multiple commands on the command line, and they will be run in sequence, just as if they were in a shell script. Like this:

[I]max@max:~/prime/phrot\$ ./go ; cd ../mprime ; ./mprime -d[/I]
(note: in this case, "go" is a small shell script that I use to start Phrot so that I don't have to keep re-typing all those command line flags :smile:)

You can even queue up multiple things on one line like this:
[I]max@max:~/prime/phrot\$ ./go ; cd ../llr ; ./llr -d ; cd ../llr2 ; ./llr -d ; cd ../mprime ; ./mprime -d[/I]
The above example would first run Phrot until it exits (which, if I've got the -s option set, would be either when it finds a prime, or finishes the file), then switch to one of my LLR directories, run a file there until it finishes, then switch to another LLR directory and do the same; and lastly, it will run mprime when all of those finish. I usually like to always put some sort of mprime command at the end of all of my chains of manual-reservation files; that way, if I'm not at the computer when the file finishes, it will immediately switch to mprime, which always has a continuous supply of work fed to it by PrimeNet (GIMPS's proprietary automated-testing system). :smile:

Hope this helps! :smile:

Max :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2008-12-24 19:11

Thanks Max. I think I can get something to work in Windows similiar to that. I keep forgetting that Windows command line will not execute another command until the prior one is complete. DUH And I've used the command-line for 15 years or so.

 kar_bon 2009-01-19 10:55

from Liskovets-Gallot-Conjecture: Riesel odd n:

147687*2^843689-1 is prime!

 kar_bon 2009-01-26 11:22

Riesel Base 6

29847*6^141526-1 is prime!

 gd_barnes 2009-01-27 16:59

[quote=kar_bon;160463]29847*6^141526-1 is prime![/quote]

Karsten, congrats on our first top-5000 base 6 prime!

And once again: This knocks out a base 36 k:

29847*36^70763-1 is prime

 kar_bon 2009-01-28 09:15

Riesel Base 6 again

perhaps another base-36-downer!?

and in such close series to the last one:

48950*6^143236-1 is prime!

PS: just looked at the base 36 page: another one down for this base too!

 gd_barnes 2009-01-28 12:49

[quote=kar_bon;160795]perhaps another base-36-downer!?

and in such close series to the last one:

48950*6^143236-1 is prime!

PS: just looked at the base 36 page: another one down for this base too![/quote]

Somebody bring out the fire extinguisher. Karsten is HOT! That's 2 n>800K primes base 2 and 2 n>140K primes base 6 for CRUS in the last month, all of course top-5000. Congrats!

That's amazing that you continue to find primes on k's that also make a prime on base 36. You are searching many more k's that would not be base 36 and further: if the prime were odd-n, the base 36 k would remain.

For the record on base 36:

48950*36^71618-1 is prime

There are now "only" 93 k's remaining on Riesel base 36 all at n=25K with the exception of the 3 k's that are being searched for base 6. :smile:

I like base 6. This will be a very fun team effort...top-5000 range, faster testing with Phrot, not a huge # of k's remaining on either side. I think we'll get a lot of "higher" top-5000 primes out of it before the testing gets so long that the effort is not as interesting anymore for people.

Karsten, could you provide your sieve file for n>150K (assuming you sieved further). We have a sieve file for n=150K-400K for Sierp base 6 sieved to P=6T. I'm in the preliminary stages of thinking how we're going to do a team effort on both bases. Since the files could be sieved together, I'm thinking we may need to sieve deeper for the higher n-range.

Since you started this and are kindly unreserving the effort at n=150K, you'll have first "dibs" on how the Riesel side is processed. Although we'd like to use a PPRnet server, if you'd like some large manual files instead (perhaps we'd split up the k's instead of n-ranges up to n<200K), that would be no problem.

Thanks,
Gary

 kar_bon 2009-01-28 13:02

Riesel Base 6

no, i've not sieved a higher p-range than yours (but to n=1M).

perhaps there's no need for a Team Drive, if i find all remaining primes to n=150k :grin:

 gd_barnes 2009-01-28 13:17

[quote=kar_bon;160813]no, i've not sieved a higher p-range than yours (but to n=1M).

perhaps there's no need for a Team Drive, if i find all remaining primes to n=150k :grin:[/quote]

Yeah, find them all! lol

What is your sieve depth? Since it's not sieved as deep, if you'll forward the file to me now, I'll coordinate a team effort to get it sieved deeper so that it can be combined with the much larger Riesel file for a very efficient combined sieve.

Gary

 mdettweiler 2009-02-03 18:39

Another one for Sierp. base 33:

1818*33^79815+1 is prime!

Only one k remaining for Sierp. base 33 (at n=100K and unreserved as previously reported in the bases > 32 status thread)--and this prime [URL="http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=86511"]makes the top-5000[/URL] to boot! :grin:

 gd_barnes 2009-02-06 01:53

[quote=mdettweiler;161465]Another one for Sierp. base 33:

1818*33^79815+1 is prime!

Only one k remaining for Sierp. base 33 (at n=100K and unreserved as previously reported in the bases > 32 status thread)--and this prime [URL="http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=86511"]makes the top-5000[/URL] to boot! :grin:[/quote]

Nice one!

This is amazing! We have yet ANOTHER Sierpinski base with 1 k remaining at n=100K. These final k's on the Sierp side are truly stubborn.

Gary

 kar_bon 2009-02-09 12:28

Riesel Base 35

here is my first base-35 prime.
after 2 'small' generalized woodalls the only one in the TOP5000 currently in the big list!

75570*35^74111-1 is prime!

i checked this k alone, because it was the one with the most candidates left to n=100k!

 gd_barnes 2009-03-16 20:00

My first non-power-of-2 top-5000 prime:

2377*28^104621+1 is prime :smile:

4 k's to go on Sierp base 28

Riesel and Sierp base 28 are both now at n=105K.

Gary

Riesel base 19

Primality testing 28034*19^92302-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 5, base 5+sqrt(5)
Calling Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge with factored part 100.00%
28034*19^92302-1 is prime! (10748.9939s+0.0356s)

I grabbed a bunch of k's, sieved them for a while and then continued only with the one that had the most candidates. I've done 57% of the range when I had found the prime.

Happy me, Willem.

 gd_barnes 2009-04-18 20:55

Excellent prime Willem! :smile:

 rogue 2009-04-19 00:30

Running N+1 test using discriminant 5, base 5+sqrt(5)
Calling Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge with factored part 100.00%
28034*19^92302-1 is prime! (10748.9939s+0.0356s)

I grabbed a bunch of k's, sieved them for a while and then continued only with the one that had the most candidates. I've done 57% of the range when I had found the prime.

Happy me, Willem.[/QUOTE]

I'm curious to know if LLR is faster than phrot for this base. Did you compare both programs?

[QUOTE=rogue;169813]I'm curious to know if LLR is faster than phrot for this base. Did you compare both programs?[/QUOTE]

Nope, the last time I thought of Phrot was when you were busy tweaking it.

Cheers, Willem.

 rogue 2009-04-20 00:26

[QUOTE=Siemelink;169933]Nope, the last time I thought of Phrot was when you were busy tweaking it.

Cheers, Willem.[/QUOTE]

It's pretty solid now. I am only aware of an issue with GFNs (b^(2^m)+1), but since genefer is primarily used for GFNs, I'm not too concerned about fixing it.

If you do decide to putter around with it, I'd be curious to see some comparison timings.

 gd_barnes 2009-05-27 18:04

Here's a nice one:

3104*22^161188-1 is prime :smile:

I FINALLY got another one on my large base 22/27/28 testing.

Only 1 k to go on Riesel base 22; continuing it up to n=200K. What else is new? ...many bases with 1 k remaining, especially on the Sierp side.

Gary

Primality testing 8681*30^140627-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 11, base 1+sqrt(11)
Calling Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge with factored part 47.32%
8681*30^140627-1 is prime! (15798.4912s+0.0541s)

Tralala, Willem.

 kar_bon 2009-08-25 20:19

There're only three base-30 primes in the Top5000 list, 9 years old and all Gen.Woodall's.
This is 10 times greater than those. Nice find!

 Xentar 2009-10-08 21:18

Boooooooom!!

122*18^292318+1 is 3-PRP!
[url]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90343[/url]

NO k remaining for Sierp b18!
Target destroyed! :bounce: :curtisc: :george: :joe o:

Theoratically, because: I still have k=18 and k=324 on my list, but I was told, that it is not necessary to test them, because k = base. Is this still correct?

I think, this are 2-3 extra beer this weekend :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2009-10-08 21:33

[QUOTE]122*18^292318+1 is 3-PRP!
[URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90343[/URL][/QUOTE]

This is turning into an epidemic. Nice work all.:party:

 gd_barnes 2009-10-08 21:36

[quote=Xentar;192263]Boooooooom!!

122*18^292318+1 is 3-PRP!
[URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90343[/URL]

NO k remaining for Sierp b18!
Target destroyed! :bounce: :curtisc: :george: :joe o:

Theoratically, because: I still have k=18 and k=324 on my list, but I was told, that it is not necessary to test them, because k = base. Is this still correct?

I think, this are 2-3 extra beer this weekend :smile:[/quote]

YES!! A tremendous prime and it is the largest prime EVER to prove a base eclipsing Rogue's Sierp base 11 prime by a moderate margin. It is also CRUS's largest prime to date narrowly edging out Chris's recent Riesel base 6 prime...that is until Serge submits his recent Riesel base 6 prime.

In a span of 5 days, CRUS has found its 3 largest primes, all in excess of 350,000 digits and all in order of size within 20,000 digits of each other. So technically we broke our own size record 3 times.

Congratulations Daniel on a tremendous effort and proof.

:george::george::george::george::george:

To make it mathematically "official", within the next 2-3 weeks, I'll construct a list of all primes for all proven bases where the final prime was n>10K.

Prof. Caldwell will be extremely happy to hear of all of these Sierp conjecture proofs for bases <= 100. Iirc, we've now proven Sierp bases 18, 57, and 99 over the last 2-3 weeks. His published math paper dealt with all Sierp bases <= 100. After an extremely long drought on proving any of them, we've taken out 3 in short order!

Congrats again to Chris, Serge, and Daniel on recent huge CRUS primes!

Daniel, you are correct. k=18 and 324 do not need a prime because they are generalized fermat #'s (GFNs). Because they are powers of the base, they could only possibly be prime for n equal to a power of 2...i.e. n=1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc. and most mathematicians agree that the # of primes of GFNs is finite unlike other forms where we believe that the # of primes should be infinite, even if we haven't found a prime up to a high limit just yet. k=1 is also a GFN but it just so happens to have a prime at n=1, i.e. the value of 19.

One more thing on GFNs: Note how they differ from multiples of the base, i.e. k=36, 54, 72, etc. Multiples of the base need an n>=1 prime unless they are a GFN.

Gary

 Flatlander 2009-10-08 21:52

[QUOTE=Xentar;192263]Boooooooom!!

122*18^292318+1 is 3-PRP!

Target destroyed! :bounce: :curtisc: :george: :joe o:
[/QUOTE]
Congratulations! I thought I heard a loud noise.
We're going to have to ask for more smilies! lol

 Mini-Geek 2009-10-08 21:56

Congrats on the huge prime!
[quote=gd_barnes;192266] Congra[U][B]d[/B][/U]ulations Daniel [/quote]
:iws:
:judge::judge:
[quote=gd_barnes;192266] Iirc, we've now proven Sierp bases 18, 57, and 99 over the last 2-3 weeks. His published math paper dealt with all Sierp bases <= 100. After an extremely long drought on proving any of them, we've taken out 3 in short order![/quote]
Hopefully we'll add Riesel base 22 to that list soon, too! :smile:

 mdettweiler 2009-10-08 22:01

Way cool! :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: :banana: :banana: :banana: It's very nice to see a base <=32 knocked out, that being this project's original scope and the range that's had the most work done. If I remember correctly, our last proof for bases <=32, Sierp. base 11, was more than a year and a half ago.

Now what would be really cool is if my quad turns up a prime on Sierp. base 33 within the next couple of days. :smile: Not quite <=32, but nonetheless it would be a great base to knock out.

 Xentar 2009-10-10 17:50

Thank you all for the congratulations :smile:

 Flatlander 2009-10-18 13:40

194*23^211140-1 (287518 digits) :smile:

Just leaves k=404 for R base 23.

Easily proven in my lifetime. [SPOILER][SIZE="1"](I'm changing my name to Methuselah.)[/SIZE][/SPOILER]

[QUOTE=Flatlander;193164]
Easily proven in my lifetime. [SPOILER][SIZE="1"](I'm changing my name to Methuselah.)[/SIZE][/SPOILER][/QUOTE]

excellent!

Willem

 gd_barnes 2009-10-19 05:25

[quote=Flatlander;193164]194*23^211140-1 (287518 digits) :smile:

Just leaves k=404 for R base 23.

Easily proven in my lifetime. [spoiler][SIZE=1](I'm changing my name to Methuselah.)[/SIZE][/spoiler][/quote]

Congrats on yet another large prime Chris! :smile::george:

 m_f_h 2009-10-19 06:01

[QUOTE=Flatlander;193164]194*23^211140-1 (287518 digits) :smile:

Just leaves k=404 for R base 23.

Easily proven in my lifetime. [SPOILER][SIZE="1"](I'm changing my name to Methuselah.)[/SIZE][/SPOILER][/QUOTE]

Congrats on that nice prime.

For k=404, I'd suggest to look for exponents = 8 (mod 12)...

 gd_barnes 2009-10-19 06:53

[quote=m_f_h;193220]Congrats on that nice prime.

For k=404, I'd suggest to look for exponents = 8 (mod 12)...[/quote]

Can you show how you came up with that? While many of the exponents that would need to be searched will be n == 8 mod 12, it would not be a good idea to look at ONLY n == 8 mod 12. Some n == 4 mod 12 must also be searched.

Proof:

The factors of 3, 5, and 13 leave n == 4, 8 mod 12 remaining.

17 is a factor of n == 4 mod 16.

That leaves n == 8, 16, 28, 32, 40, 44 mod 48 remaining.

To bring it down to n == 8 mod 12 would require that n == 16, 28, and 40 mod 48 all be eliminated by a specific covering set of factors. (Would leave n == 8, 32, and 44 mod 48, which are all n == 8 mod 12.) The first 3 occurrences of each of the n==16,28,40mod48 n-values, i.e. n=16, 28, 40, 64, 76, 88, 112, 124, & 136 have smallest factors of 43, 19, 31, 19, 862607762761, 97, 2607312184177832981, 607, & 19 respectively.

The two huge smallest factors for n=76 and n=112 clearly demonstrate there is no covering set of factors for n == 16, 28, and 40 mod 48. Since these are all n == 4 mod 12, we can conclude:

Some but not all n == 4 or 8 mod 12 must be searched and it can be narrowed down to 1/8th of all n-values (6 out of every 48) with the above. It could also be narrowed further by eliminating the factor of 19 that occurs every n == 1 mod 9 and the factor of 31 that occurs every n == 0 mod 10. But showing them here would be cumbersome as it would require that we go to n == xxx mod 720.

Besides, srsieve and sr1sieve will quickly eliminate the appropriate n-values. There is already posted a file on the web page.

Edit: If anyone is interested in seeing the factorizations of the first 150 n-values for 404*23^n-1, check out Syd's factoring database [URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/search.php?query=404*23%5En-1&v=n&n=1&EC=1&E=1&Prp=1&P=1&C=1&FF=1&CF=1&of=H&pp=150"]here[/URL]. I was quickly able to fully factor the first 50 n-values. For n-values > 50, the database quickly automatically factors to 10e5. Some of those are fully factored and some aren't. I ran some ECM curves on the n-values that pertained to this (as well as a few others) and came up with the large factors shown above and others that are > 10e5.

Gary

 MyDogBuster 2009-10-21 17:39

Sierp Base 23

Okay guys and girls - a true monster

68*23^365239+1 is prime [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90552[/URL]

This proves the conjecture, Doc Caldwell likes it.

497358 digits. This is my largest prime yet by about 200K digits. It hits the big time at 94th place in the Top 5000.

Releasing the base.

 Flatlander 2009-10-21 18:17

Somebody catch Gary!

Congratulations Ian :groupwave::bow wave:

 Xentar 2009-10-21 19:26

Congratulations - another one proven :groupwave:

[QUOTE=MyDogBuster;193471]Okay guys and girls - a true monster

68*23^365239+1 is prime [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90552[/URL]

This proves the conjecture, Doc Caldwell likes it.

497358 digits. This is my largest prime yet by about 200K digits. It hits the big time at 94th place in the Top 5000.

Releasing the base.[/QUOTE]

Excellent stuff!

Willem.

 gd_barnes 2009-10-22 01:33

[quote=MyDogBuster;193471]Okay guys and girls - a true monster

68*23^365239+1 is prime [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90552[/URL]

This proves the conjecture, Doc Caldwell likes it.

497358 digits. This is my largest prime yet by about 200K digits. It hits the big time at 94th place in the Top 5000.

Releasing the base.[/quote]

Oh yeah!! Here we go again! A score of 50 for this truly huge monster!!

We've now proven Sierp bases 18, 23, 57, and 99 in the last month or so and nearly 18 months after proving our first big one...Sierp base 11. There were so many Sierp bases with only 1 k remaining, it had to start happening at some time. I think it's time to prove a Riesel base now.

A huge congrats Ian!

:george::george::george::george::george::george::george::george::george:

I have to razz you here...So, you're releasing the base, eh? Just what would someone else test on it...a larger k=68 prime? lmao

Gary

 gd_barnes 2009-10-22 01:48

[quote=MyDogBuster;193471]Okay guys and girls - a true monster

68*23^365239+1 is prime [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90552[/URL]

This proves the conjecture, Doc Caldwell likes it.

497358 digits. This is my largest prime yet by about 200K digits. It hits the big time at 94th place in the Top 5000.

Releasing the base.[/quote]

One more bit of interesting info. about this one: As far as I can tell, this is the 1st base proven with TWO primes of n>100K! :smile:

 MyDogBuster 2009-10-22 01:53

[QUOTE]I have to razz you here...So, you're releasing the base, eh? Just what would someone else test on it...a larger k=68 prime? [/QUOTE]

After getting ripped for NOT releasing bases, I'm just covering my butt.:crank:

Thanks all.

 mdettweiler 2009-10-23 05:22

[quote=MyDogBuster;193471]Okay guys and girls - a true monster

68*23^365239+1 is prime [URL]http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=90552[/URL]

This proves the conjecture, Doc Caldwell likes it.

497358 digits. This is my largest prime yet by about 200K digits. It hits the big time at 94th place in the Top 5000.

Releasing the base.[/quote]
I believe I've already stated this in another thread, but congratulations again for proving this base, and with such a humongous prime to boot! It's very nice to see another of the bases <32 proven, one of my personal goals that I've had for a long time.

Interestingly enough, as I believed had been mentioned a bit in some other threads, I had originally been hoping to reserve this base and run it during my trip before you'd nabbed it. But, now that I think about it, since my quad ended up being off all throughout my trip, if I had reserved it, it probably would be hovering only around 302K or so right now and a few weeks away from the proof! :smile: So, indeed, it definitely worked out quite nicely that you did it. Hey, whatever works--doesn't matter who does it as long as it gets done as quickly as possible. :tu:

I see now that you've also grabbed Sierp. base 12, another base I was considering doing in the future. I hope that one goes well for you too--I did quite a bit of searching on it in the past and it definitely seems overdue for a prime, which would, like your base 23 prime, be extremely large. Now that Riesel base 23 has been whittled down to one k by Chris, I'll probably tackle it if it's still at large when I'm done with my current work.

Meanwhile, I've got a base 206 prime coming up soon that I'll prove in a moment. I must admit I really have no idea what size it is since I'm not very familiar with base 206, but I'll be sure to calculate it when I report it here. :smile:

All times are UTC. The time now is 14:20.