HRB,
No thanks, on computing I know that I'm a big loser..

[QUOTE=blob100;204051]HRB,
No thanks, on computing I know that I'm a big loser.[/QUOTE]

If you already know that, then why do you believe you're not also a big loser on mathemating?

[CODE]cout << "Do you want fries with this?" << endl;[/CODE]

[QUOTE=__HRB__;204048][...]but I'll attempt to be serious for the next 2 posts.[/QUOTE]

Now, that worked well...

[QUOTE=__HRB__;204056]If you already know that, then why do you believe you're not also a big loser on mathemating?

[CODE]cout << "Do you want fries with this?" << endl;[/CODE][/QUOTE]

LOL. You're making me hungry!

I think the reason why so many inexperienced people tend to think they have "proven" something great in mathematics or have obtained a "butifull conjektur" (or some Klingon variant) is because a lot of this stuff is theoretical. With subjects like programming, you immediately know if you're right or wrong (i.e. you either get a compiler or run-time error). Same with surgery. Most people don't want to operate on someone unless they have had the proper medical training beforehand. Since in theoretical aspects of mathematics the consequences are not readily demonstrable, cranks (or ignorant 14 year olds) tend to believe that they are correct and will do anything to provide evidence (though faulty) towards that assertion.

[QUOTE=flouran;204060]LOL[/QUOTE]

I think we should play practical jokes on Adi Shamir more often.

[quote=__HRB__;204056]If you already know that, then why do you believe you're not also a big loser on mathemating?
[/quote]
I know that I'm a big loser in computing becuase I'm not spending my time on it.
Mathematics is the thing that I mostly love, I know that I'm not euler or gauss but I still love it.
BTW: do you indicate that I'm a loser in mathematics (if so keep it inside, I know it but it makes me feel bad.)

Tomer

It is really easy to call me an "ignorant" but weren't you 14 years old?
Didn't you start too?

And you two should know that I don't think I found a "biutifull conjektur" as you said.

[QUOTE=blob100;204065]BTW: do you indicate that I'm a loser in mathematics (if so keep it inside, I know it but it makes me feel bad.)[/QUOTE]

Among some of the people you'll find in this forum? Definitely. Among pimply 14-year-olds with ideas too big for their own good, I'd say you're doing about average. At your age I was very much into chemistry because I really wanted to make stuff that goes BANG. In hindsight, I am very much ashamed at the ways I attempted to make nitric acid from readily available materials, such as winding insulated wire around an aluminium(!) core plugged into a 220V outlet hoping for a spark and nitrous oxides...not to mention buying $20 worth of indigo and ending up with about 1g of picric acid...when all you need is battery acid, fertilizer, a Liebig-condenser and glycerin (ethylene glycol didn't work very well). OK, you also need the mercury form an old barometer to make the blasting caps. When I was about 17 I could make nitroglycerin in batches of 15-20g every 30 minutes...250g of that stuff really makes a nice BOOOOM. I wish I had known more about shaped charges...

But I digress...

Get used to dealing with feeling bad. Nothing anyone can say here compares to what girls will do to your ego in the next couple of years. Trust me.

[QUOTE=__HRB__;204080]
Get used to dealing with feeling bad. Nothing anyone can say here compares to what girls will do to your ego in the next couple of years. Trust me.[/QUOTE]
Don't they occasionally have arranged marriages in Israel?

My attempt to clarify your conjeture
 

[QUOTE=blob100;204033]i didnt need to enter this forum on the begining, it just made me run out of my passion to mathematics.[/QUOTE]

Tomer, did you read my previous post? I was trying to warn you that sometimes help on a internet math forum isn't "nice". They are trying to help, though, but they don't realice that sometimes phrases like "translate gibberish" "You are writing NONSENSE", "Is mathematical gibberish" can be offensive.

I think your problem is not english, but the lack of examples of computation (like showing wich primes are allowed for your "p" with the calculations you do and why you conclude it is allowed or not, for the firsts 10 prime numbers).

I tried to understand you conjecture, I'll try my best to write it as I understood, but I modified it a little to simplify it. For example I assume your "n" equals 1 instead of any natural number to simplify it a bit, and changed your letter "m" to "s" (for "small")
I also assume you meant
[TEX]2^{3n} \equiv +1 (mod 7)[/TEX]
instead of
[TEX]2^{3n} \equiv -1 (mod 7)[/TEX]
because for n=1 it would be
[TEX]2^3=8 \equiv -1 (mod 7)[/TEX]
I'm not an expert on [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_arithmetic"]modular arithmetic[/URL], but would't that mean that
8-(-1)=9 is a multiple of 7?

Here goes my attempt to explain your conjeture, please correct where it doesn't fit your original conjeture:

For each prime number "p" we can compute a positive
integer number "s" such that "s" is the smallest
factor of "p-1" such that:

2^s > p

For example
[CODE]p=3 s=2 because 2^2=4>3
p=5 s=4 because 2^4=16>5
p=7 s=3 because 2^3=8>7
p=11 s=5 because 2^5=32>11
p=13 s=4 because 2^4=16>13
p=17 s=8 because 2^8=256>17[/CODE]

Conjeture: If for a given "p" the corresponding "s" is an odd number,
then 2^s-1 is divisible by "p"

In our examples
[CODE]p=7 s=3 2^3-1=7 is divisible by 7
p=11 s=5 2^5-1=31 is divisible by 11? OUCH! Counter-example? Why p=11 wouldn't be allowed?[/CODE]

Having reached here, I would need to know why p=11 isn't allowed, or where is my mistake.