[QUOTE=science_man_88;475682]Your same inputs part has nothing to do with it. If you input is n-2 Fermat's output would be for n.[/QUOTE]
Correct.

But what should then happen is for "equivalent" inputs to be run...that is [I](n-2)[/I] for the first case and [I]n[/I] for Fermat.

Any volunteers. I do not want to do it myself, because my expertise is under suspicion (no problem), so I think whatever I come up with might be questionable right from the starting blocks.

So I think it would be better to come from more established contributors.

[QUOTE=ATH;475686]It was proven to you, but you do not accept the proof, so there is not much else we can do.

You agreed your algorithm gave the same false positives as I showed for fermat pseudoprime base 2 right? So why is it so hard to believe they are the same?

Try and find different beginners guides to modular arithmetic, because you do not understand it yet.[/QUOTE]
POST RESULTS FOR ALL TO SEE.

[QUOTE=10metreh;475700]Here is some Pari code to run your test for numbers n+2 from 1 to 10000, and print the false positives along with a counter:
[CODE]x=0;for(n=-1,9998,if(isprime(n+2)==0&&(2^n-1)%(n+2)==(n+1)/2,x++;print(x" "n+2)))[/CODE]

Here is its output:

[CODE]1 341
2 561
3 645
4 1105
5 1387
6 1729
7 1905
8 2047
9 2465
10 2701
11 2821
12 3277
13 4033
14 4369
15 4371
16 4681
17 5461
18 6601
19 7957
20 8321
21 8481
22 8911[/CODE]

Here is some code to run Fermat's test to base 2 for n from 1 to 10000, and similarly print the false positives:
[CODE]x=0;for(n=1,10000,if(isprime(n)==0&&(2^(n-1))%n==1,x++;print(x" "n)))[/CODE]

Here is its output:
[CODE]1 341
2 561
3 645
4 1105
5 1387
6 1729
7 1905
8 2047
9 2465
10 2701
11 2821
12 3277
13 4033
14 4369
15 4371
16 4681
17 5461
18 6601
19 7957
20 8321
21 8481
22 8911[/CODE]

Does that look at all familiar?[/QUOTE]
Hi 10metreh

OMG. It is exactly THE SAME.

[B]I accept now that the algorithm is a "clone" and that it is a repitition of Fermat. I shall not persue this matter any further.
[/B]
I apologise to all the contributors that tried to unsuccessfully point this out to me for wasting your time all the while.

[I]Now all that remains, if anybody might be interested, would be how I derived "my" algorithm. I did not reference to Fermat.[/I]

Oh my goodness!

[QUOTE=gophne;475794]POST RESULTS FOR ALL TO SEE.[/QUOTE]


:caps-lock:

Hi MisterBitcoin

Hahaha

We need to develop some kind of operational manual for dealing with people who appear, at first glance, to be having an acutely difficult time with … . To ban people in such a state does a disservice to someone who is seeking a community for whatever comfort.

I see a lot of people at risk who are mocked and dismissed. Is engaging the right method; doubtful.

I do not have a solution but I think we need to do better.

[QUOTE=flagrantflowers;476104]

I do not have a solution but I think we need to do better.[/QUOTE]

...then you are part of the problem... :smile: just kidding.

[ATTACH]17456[/ATTACH]

Yay! :razz: