[QUOTE=Uncwilly;351955]Ditto[/QUOTE]

Thank you guys. :smile:

[rant]
After 30 years of work in the IT market, having tested computers ranging from IBM 360 to the last GPU cluster as programmer, system manager, function analyst, program manager and CTO, my actual firm decided last year to lower my salary by nearly 30%, and offered me an Help desk operator job.
Then they noticed that a non-skilled scriptt kiddie would cost far less than me, and fired me.
The situation in Italy is the following: 12% jobless, 34% of the workig-capable population less than 26 years old jobless as well.
I am 51, I worked for the last 30 years trying to improve my skill offering added value to the groups where I stayed, studying by myself whatever could help giving me more credibility, and the net result is that "you are too skilled for us".
I guess this is how IBM managers felt during the Ackers' times, but they lived in a Country where your skill were recognized, many of them recovered. There is no such hope in Italy... :sad:
[/rant]

Luigi

[QUOTE=ET_;351836]I I'm losing my "real-life"[sup]TM[/sup] job and am quite nervous about it.[/QUOTE]Been there, done that. It's a worry, no doubt, but it's also an opportunity to do something different.

If there's any way I can help, please let me know by email or through [URL="http://linkedin.com"]linkedin[/URL].

Paul

[QUOTE=ATH;351999]See post #122 - #131 in this thread.[/QUOTE]

... which is a unix program and I am a windowser (thank you though for the advice), so yes I saw a while ago

[QUOTE=ewmayer;313373]For Win64 users I suggest using a Linux/GCC emulator like mingw64, so you can enjoy the benefit of the 64-bit inline ASM in the core modmul routine.[/QUOTE]

... but to install mingw64 was not so easy, so I have not had the time to complete it.

Anyway, here is what I want to do:

[QUOTE=Batalov;351713]by Tony Forbes [URL="http://www.garlic.com/~wedgingt/MMPstats.txt"][COLOR=#0066cc]via Will Edgington[/COLOR][/URL][/QUOTE]

this list reports:

86243: (All from 2*k = 9954 tested for primality)
15418*(2^86243-1) + 1 is prime
58818*(2^86243-1) + 1 is prime

When I tested / did a double check with PFGW it reported:

7709*2*(2^86243-1)+1 is 3-PRP! (3.8505s+0.0002s)
29409*2*(2^86243-1)+1 is 3-PRP! (3.8213s+0.0002s)
which equals these two results, but also

21422*2*(2^86243-1)+1 is 3-PRP! (3.8533s+0.0002s)

which is not included on the list, maybe its not reported because its not "prime", but at least I got interested to test if it divides MM86243, just making sure ...

so maybe someone could help me do the test while I continue struggle with mingw64, which may take a while. And if it is actually a factor of MM86243 I am willing to share the glory! :smile:

Answer: nope, nope, and nope.

TL;DR version:

k=21422 is 2 (mod 4)
There is no reason to test if its q=2*k*MM#28+1 divides MM#28. It won't.
[hint: all Mp are 7 (mod 8), and if k=2|[SUB]4[/SUB], then 2*k=4|[SUB]8[/SUB], so 2*k*Mp+1=4*7+1=29|[SUB]8[/SUB], i.e. =5|[SUB]8[/SUB], but we know all factors of a Mp must be 1 or 7 (mod 8)]
Factors q=2kMp+1 of MMp can only have k which is 0 or 1 (mod 4).
(this does not exclude the possibility of this q being prime!)

ex:

[CODE]
gp > work(7700,28)
Sorry, 2* 7701 *M86243+1 is divisible by 5
>>> 2* 7704 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*7704*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 7705 *M86243+1 is divisible by 3
Sorry, 2* 7708 *M86243+1 is divisible by 3
>>> 2* 7709 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test:[COLOR=Red] 2*7709*M86243+1[/COLOR] does not divide MM86243
break>
............
gp > work(29300,28,10^8,10,1000)
Sorry, 2* 29304 *M86243+1 is divisible by 20899
>>> 2* 29309 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*29309*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 29325 *M86243+1 is divisible by 489653
Sorry, 2* 29340 *M86243+1 is divisible by 57559
>>> 2* 29349 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*29349*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 29360 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*29360*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 29400 *M86243+1 is divisible by 377257
>>> 2* 29409 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test:[COLOR=Red] 2*29409*M86243+1[/COLOR] does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 29448 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*29448*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 29460 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*29460*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
break>
.............
gp > work(21000,28,10^8,10,1000)
Sorry, 2* 21005 *M86243+1 is divisible by 13031827
>>> 2* 21020 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21020*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21032 *M86243+1 is divisible by 5001379
Sorry, 2* 21033 *M86243+1 is divisible by 14419
Sorry, 2* 21053 *M86243+1 is divisible by 819157
>>> 2* 21080 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21080*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21081 *M86243+1 is divisible by 5
>>> 2* 21084 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
>>> 2* 21108 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21108*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21144 *M86243+1 is divisible by 685001
Sorry, 2* 21164 *M86243+1 is divisible by 32558371
>>> 2* 21173 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21173*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 21213 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21213*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21233 *M86243+1 is divisible by 1523099
Sorry, 2* 21264 *M86243+1 is divisible by 24379
>>> 2* 21284 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21284*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21285 *M86243+1 is divisible by 5974223
>>> 2* 21297 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21297*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 21332 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21332*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21348 *M86243+1 is divisible by 39717263
>>> 2* 21353 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21353*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21357 *M86243+1 is divisible by 49333
Sorry, 2* 21377 *M86243+1 is divisible by 767527
>>> 2* 21384 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21384*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 21405 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21405*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
>>> 2* 21420 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21420*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
[COLOR=Red]**** NO 21422 HERE! *****[/COLOR]
>>> 2* 21453 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21453*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21465 *M86243+1 is divisible by 506491
Sorry, 2* 21473 *M86243+1 is divisible by 247771
Sorry, 2* 21489 *M86243+1 is divisible by 21910193
>>> 2* 21492 *M86243+1 reached the upper limit q=100000000 without a factor being found!
Trial Factoring Test: 2*21492*M86243+1 does not divide MM86243
Sorry, 2* 21497 *M86243+1 is divisible by 2084249
break>
[/CODE]

Here is Tim Sorbera's answer related to the search.

The historypage has been updated, waiting for Tony Forbes' answer now.

We have some new primes: should I create a new table holding them all?

Luigi
---


---------------

I have fully completed the following ranges, and do not currently have
any reservations or in-progress work:
MM2281 from k=8717474 to 50000000
MM11213 from k=863503 to 1000000
MM86243 from k=546184 to 1000000

I submitted the MM86243 work to Will Edgington 2011-01-12, but
apparently it was never put on his site; I don't know why. In case
you're interested in the historical data, I had completed my work on
MM2281 and MM11213 by 2011-01-02, and my work on MM86243 by
2011-01-12.

I found primes from MM11213's search (none are factors):
1730382*(2^11213-1)+1
1739916*(2^11213-1)+1
1746678*(2^11213-1)+1
1749226*(2^11213-1)+1
1751356*(2^11213-1)+1
1827616*(2^11213-1)+1
1854840*(2^11213-1)+1
1858722*(2^11213-1)+1
1885840*(2^11213-1)+1
1892338*(2^11213-1)+1
1895992*(2^11213-1)+1
1928482*(2^11213-1)+1
1954536*(2^11213-1)+1
1955706*(2^11213-1)+1
1969000*(2^11213-1)+1
1979848*(2^11213-1)+1
1981272*(2^11213-1)+1
1996512*(2^11213-1)+1
1998048*(2^11213-1)+1

And from MM86243's search (again, none are factors):
1241154*(2^86243-1)+1
1311784*(2^86243-1)+1
1370610*(2^86243-1)+1
1393216*(2^86243-1)+1
1412050*(2^86243-1)+1
1450720*(2^86243-1)+1
1681690*(2^86243-1)+1
1687410*(2^86243-1)+1
1869994*(2^86243-1)+1

Thanks,
Tim Sorbera

[QUOTE=LaurV;352143]Answer: nope, nope, and nope.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for the answer! (I don't know if it makes me look less stupid :smile:, but after posting I came to think of that this must be the reason for it not being included on the list (the list though makes you think all K:s were tested), sometimes I post a little to quickly before I have thought through all aspects of the issue, thanks for your patience)

Once again thank you LaurV

[QUOTE=ET_;352145]We have some new primes: should I create a new table holding them all?[/QUOTE]

Yes, I would like that very much because there is a risk that they are forgotten otherwise in the end.

[QUOTE=aketilander;352151]Yes, I would like that very much because there is a risk that they are forgotten otherwise in the end.[/QUOTE]

I'll try to accomplish during the afternoon... :smile:

BTW, I'm going to add the K, not the 2K. Is it correct for you?

Luigi

[QUOTE=ET_;352156]I'll try to accomplish during the afternoon... :smile:

BTW, I'm going to add the K, not the 2K. Is it correct for you?[/QUOTE]

Yes that's much better to avoid misstakes.

Tony answered
 

I just gor Tony Forbes' reply.

He did not work on double Mersennes since our last talk on Sept. 2012.

Now is time to add LaurV's upates to the history page. :smile:

If I read it correctly, all red values on column F of sheet 03 "TF High Water Mark" (except for the new records of Tim Sorbera) should be replaced by those on column H.

Rows 29, 30 and 31 still awaiting for confirmation.

LaurV, is that correct? Would you like your real name on the table?

Luigi

P.S. Is anyone still working on these ranges? Or should I just put "DoubleMersennes.org - continuing"?

Known DM prime factors thusfar
 

They are in the attached list, I'm inserting them in a web.searchable table as well.

Let me know if there are more to add.

Luigi