I'll see your Dilbert and raise you an xkcd:
[url]http://xkcd.com/221/[/url]

For logs of different bases:

Ex: log[sub]10[/sub](n):

Should I write: 10^x=n; x = log[sub]10[/sub](n)?

It states: "deep recursion", when I test it.

log(n)/log(10)

[QUOTE]log(n)/log(10)[/QUOTE]

log(n)/log(10)? :orly owl:

:omg: You're right.

[QUOTE=3.14159;222500]log(n)/log(10)?

You're right.[/QUOTE]

first I knew how to do any log like that and second the second picture looks like one of my cats lol.

[QUOTE]first I knew how to do any log like that and second the second picture looks like one of my cats lol.[/QUOTE]

How many cats do you have?

[QUOTE=3.14159;222533]How many cats do you have?[/QUOTE]

off topic or what lol 3 surviving so far 1 that got take by coyotes i think and one long before that and I think we had 2 dogs while growing up my sister is moved out and has a hampster at last check.

[QUOTE]off topic or what lol 3 surviving so far 1 that got take by coyotes i think and one long before that and I think we had 2 dogs while growing up my sister is moved out and has a hampster at last check.[/QUOTE]

Yep. Another case of :direction:

Anyway:

I'll see if I can code retina's test, which I saved onto a text document.

[QUOTE=3.14159;222536]I'll see if I can code retina's test, which I saved onto a text document.[/QUOTE]First time I've ever had a test named after me. However I don't think it is worthy of either being named after anyone or being called a test. It is just a bound selection.

As for the MR test bound. I never posted my test bounds because they don't apply to your case. I never did a proof, I stopped at the MR test. My level of paranoia allowed me to stop when I was satisfied that the estimated MR failure probability was <2[sup]-100[/sup]. [size=1]Note that this level of probability is the same as used by the banking industry when selecting "random" primes for their crypto systems.[/size]

[QUOTE]First time I've ever had a test named after me. However I don't think it is worthy of either being named after anyone or being called a test. It is just a bound selection.[/QUOTE]

Only applies if your name is really "Retina".

[QUOTE]As for the MR test bound. I never posted my test bounds because they don't apply to your case. I never did a proof, I stopped at the MR test. My level of paranoia allowed me to stop when I was satisfied that the estimated MR failure probability was <2[sup]100[/sup]. Note that this level of probability is the same as used by the banking industry when selecting "random" numbers for their crypto systems.[/QUOTE]

Probability that an attack might succeed? Or one of the pseudoprimes being chosen being a composite pseudoprime? Also: I'm sure you meant: 1 in 2[sup]100[/sup].

[QUOTE=3.14159;222539]Probability that an attack might succeed? Or one of the numbers not being prime?[/QUOTE]Probability of the number not really being prime.