[QUOTE=retina;327609]Mmm, okay, now I know what the new prime is.[/QUOTE]Reminds of the last discovery "Another success?" (Lycorn with enough info for us to know what the expo was).

George was predictably on vacation, but Tony Reix asked us to tell him the exponent so that he could verify it. I (inter alia) duly did that.

Prematurely you spilled the beans and were duly ticked of by me and Tony.
Nice to see a bit of restraint this time around:smile:

D

-

That was totally going to be my guess, too.

[QUOTE=NBtarheel_33;327678]Seconded[/QUOTE]

It doesn't fit in with the "Crank P-1 smooth exponent" (TM) hypothesis, however.

[QUOTE=axn;327684]It doesn't fit in with the "Crank P-1 smooth exponent" (TM) hypothesis, however.[/QUOTE]

Refresh my memory on that hypothesis?

How about the New Mersenne Conjecture?

[QUOTE=axn;327684]It doesn't fit in with the "Crank P-1 smooth exponent" (TM) hypothesis, however.[/QUOTE]
How did 1398269 and 24036583? :wink:

While me are waiting........
 

GIMPS:
Average gap from expo 21M to 43M ~1.11
Max was ~1.15
Theory says 1.31 is 50/50.
Average of a random selection of gaps less than this is ~ 1.11.
Mean/expected gap is ~1.47.

Annoyingly, 1.34 is [B]just [/B]"tails" (assuming ~58M for our new baby).

D

[QUOTE=NBtarheel_33;327686]Refresh my memory on that hypothesis?

How about the New Mersenne Conjecture?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Ralf Recker;327687]How did 1398269 and 24036583? :wink:[/QUOTE]

Not my hypothesis.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;326190]The Crank p-1 Smoothness Hypothesis [cPSH] indicates both of those exponents as highly unlikely M-prime candidates.

(I prepend 'crank' not because I don't think there's anything to it, but because such claims of not-complete-randomness must be assumed crankish until evidence is found for *why* they should be true. For known M-primes, we have lots of intriguing experimental data but no known mathematical reason for the alleged behavior).[/QUOTE]

Also [url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=5339[/url] (Post 32 onwards). Note that the promulgator of said crankitude is aware of the identity of the exponent in question.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;327600][URL]http://www.mersenne.org/report_milestones/[/URL]

Countdown to testing all exponents below M(xxxxxxxx) once: 52,242
Countdown to proving M(xxxxxxxx) is the 48th Mersenne Prime: 566,187[/QUOTE]

Some (very) early ETAs (based on what has been cleared in the last ten hours or so): December 21, 2013 for the first-time milestone, and October 27, [B]2026[/B] for the double-check milestone. I'll be 44 years old on the latter date. George will be just shy of 69, and GIMPS will be 30.

The (newest) DC milestone may be the furthest out that has ever been reported. Reminds me of the sign that used to be on Interstate 40 out in the New Mexico(?) desert that gave the distance to Los Angeles at over a thousand miles.

[QUOTE=Prime95;327045]and now the bad news.....

Press coverage is always hit or miss. One of our least covered discoveries occurred when we sent the press release out on a Friday. Consequently, Scott is emailing our press contact list Tuesday at 6AM PST. We'll try to coordinate mersenne.org's web site, this forum, Chris Caldwell's site, and maybe wikipedia.[/QUOTE]

Only 94 minutes left!!!

[URL]http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/city.html?n=137[/URL]

You know, folks, if the new prime is as large as we think it is going to be, the associated perfect number will be on the order of 2^115,000,000 give or take. That will be the largest known perfect number, of course, and also the first over 100,000,000 bits...