m52 found (I'm SuperCerberus!)
hello people after much trial and error and hard work. i came up with a bulletproof formula this time for mersenne numbers, it is a formula that generates m23 all the way up to m51 without skipping any numbers nor any extra non prime numbers. this must be it. according to my formula m52 should be 87357233! i can finalyl prove to you people i am not stupid

I suggest you read [url=https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=502537&postcount=1]this post[/url] and then post your guess to that thread.

[QUOTE=samuel;520353]hello people after much trial and error and hard work. i came up with a bulletproof formula this time for mersenne numbers, it is a formula that generates m23 all the way up to m51 without skipping any numbers nor any extra non prime numbers. this must be it. according to my formula m52 should be 87357233! i can finalyl prove to you people i am not stupid[/QUOTE]
Taking pot shots is not going to get you anywhere. Please post your "formula". :rant: 
Raises an interesting point.
Let's assume for a moment that this new prediction is prime. Or it doesn't matter actually, it could be any future crackpot that predicts some exponent; eventually someone might get lucky and actually hit a prime. So someone else does the OP's work for him and tests it showing it is prime. Who gets to be the discoverer? 
[QUOTE=retina;520358]Raises an interesting point.
Let's assume for a moment that this new prediction is prime. Or it doesn't matter actually, it could be any future crackpot that predicts some exponent; eventually someone might get lucky and actually hit a prime. So someone else does the OP's work for him and tests it showing it is prime. Who gets to be the discoverer?[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.mersenne.org/legal/[/url] might have the answer. It says therein [QUOTE]Awardees. "Awardee" is understood to be the Participant, or the group, team, organization or legal entity the Participant represents, and whose computer achieves a research discovery for which an award exists and all Rules in effect at the time of the discovery comply.[/QUOTE] 
Exponent status for p = 87357233 is [url=https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=87357233&exp_hi=87357233&full=1&ecmhist=1]here[/url]. No factors < 2[sup]76[/sup].
It looks like an LL test is supposed to be in progress, but progress is slow. I suppose it's [i]possible[/i] the OP read the information available in the exponent status before posting this guess. [u][b]EDIT:[/b][/u] BTW, also from Legal (I obliterated the Email address):[quote][u]Discovery Evidence.[/u] As proof of discovery, Participant agrees to email to GIMPS at [/email]XXXXXXX@XXX.XXX.XXX[/email] certain data files generated by any software program used to make the discovery, along with their name, post mailing address, phone number, and GIMPS user ID if not anonymous. If proof is not satisfactory, it will be treated as an unclaimed award.[/quote] 
u guys are very rude, one of you changed my thread title without asking, this is like killing my freedom of speech. u guys are trying to silence me this is so totally awful and nasty u should be ashamed of yourself whichever moron that did that mine is definitely correct this time, it is generated by a polynomial of degree 45 that hits every mersenne prime from m23 up to m51 within 0.0001 precision. so m52 must be correct. u guys r laughing now but wont be laughing when u found out 87357233 is actually prime then <not nice> will cry to me asking for formula. then i am going to ask for apologies from every single one of u before giving it out lol

[QUOTE=samuel;520754]u guys are very rude, one of you changed my thread title without asking, this is like killing my freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]Sorry, we won't change it back. How far along the PRP or LL run on your candidate number are you?
Before saying that M52 has been found on this forum, specific criteria that must be met. It has to have had a clean LL run (or maybe PRP), and it needs a sanity check of the last few thousand iterations being redone. For you to say that you found it without an LL test, you need to show a mathematical *proof* why your algorithm produces only Meresenne Primes. Also, it must handle all cases including 2, 3, & 7. 
[QUOTE=Uncwilly;520757]For you to say that you found it without an LL test, you need to show a mathematical *proof* why your algorithm produces only Meresenne Primes. Also, it must handle all cases including 2, 3, & 7.[/QUOTE]
Unless of course you can also provide a solid, robust mathematical justification as to why it only works above a certain size. 
[QUOTE=samuel;520754]u guys are very rude, one of you changed my thread title without asking, this is like killing my freedom of speech. u guys are trying to silence me this is so totally awful and nasty u should be ashamed of yourself whichever moron that did that mine is definitely correct this time, it is generated by a polynomial of degree 45 that hits every mersenne prime from m23 up to m51 within 0.0001 precision. so m52 must be correct. u guys r laughing now but wont be laughing when u found out 87357233 is actually prime then <not nice> will cry to me asking for formula. then i am going to ask for apologies from every single one of u before giving it out lol[/QUOTE]
87357233 is definitely prime, but you need to learn about curve overfitting. 
[QUOTE=samuel;520754]u guys are very rude[/QUOTE]
Hi samuel. You'll find, if you dig around some other forums on this site, that I'll be the first to criticise members for being rude and unwelcoming. However, I've struggled to find anything in this thread which is unreasonable. It would be lovely to think you have found a formula which can generate mersenne prime exponents. However, your last attempt at this was littered with outlandish claims, accusations and hubris. I think we would have all hoped that you would have taken from the last experiment that the distribution of prime numbers is much more complicated than any algebraic relationship will find. I'm loathed to say "don't bother" but at the very least "go ahead, have fun, but please realise that there is a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance that you will actually find what you are looking for and please present your conjectures with an appropriate amount of humility". I do feel that the comical renaming of threads is a little rude, when a neutral renaming could be just as effective, but apart from that, I fear you are witnessing the result of prior burnt bridges. 
All times are UTC. The time now is 16:42. 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000  2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.