Possibly prime
 

By a currently bizarre method I've estimated that
2^(33554837)-1
repeat
2^33554837 -1
is prime.
Has this number been checked out using the forum methods?
If not, anyone willing to do it?
I don't have the computer capacity.

The method is really rather bizarre, as 33554837 = 397 * 84521 is composite and so trivially cannot be the exponent of a Mersenne prime.

Alex

Thanks.
 

I was trying something by hand on paper.
Back to the drawing board, one might say.

Further
 

Because 33554836 has its lowest term as 2^2, I
was pretty sure it might turn out ,minimally, pseudo.
The question is , is it?
Again my computer won't run (2^(p-1)-1)/p?

Also
 

I notice that 33554839 is prime, but I can't as yet
say anything about 2^33554839-1

Get the factors.zip file from George's Status page and the decomp.exe program. Then you can easily look up that 2^33554839-1 has 73887755479 as the smallest known prime factor. It wouldn't have been difficult to rediscover that factor with Prime95 even on an incredibly slow PC, either.

Alex

"I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue"

Where my experimental work didn't confirm a mersenne.
 

Since I have never taken pleasure from , quote, 'sniffing glue', and these days
am suspicious of sweet smelling gasoline fumes accumulating dirt, mixed with moisture ,to boot, as involuntary impositions, I am trying to focus on other things.
From what I could tell,(my method takes on a different perspective for numbers with 'peak' as even, 2^26+)
the mersenne candidate I gave was invalid , because 2^26-2 ,didn't appear to divide (2^33554839-2)! .This ,given, 2^33554837,had an obvious fault of
2^2 dividing out,The 'bizarre' method is simply to carry out this division,and
to add to it,look for a case 2^1 included , does the job.

Do you use a zircon-encrusted slide rule for your calculations?

[i]With a pair of heavy duty,
Zircon-encrusted slide rules in my hand,
Mathematical folks would know
That I was pretty grand.[/i]

:lol:

Zirconium
 

These days I can enjoy stereo chemistry, but as far as 15000 c degree plasma,
zirconium,silica,boron and 2nd to third generation computers, I prefer the more modern elevated superconductive technology, potential.Say,
have any idea how much matter and space is needed, for gravity to induce
a volume variable.

[i]I might be movin' to Montana soon
Just to raise me up a crop of Dental Floss
Raisin' it up
Waxin' it down
In a little white box
I can sell uptown[/i]

[quote=David John Hill Jr;99203]These days I can enjoy stereo chemistry, but as far as 15000 c degree plasma,
zirconium,silica,boron and 2nd to third generation computers, I prefer the more modern elevated superconductive technology, potential.Say,
have any idea how much matter and space is needed, for gravity to induce
a volume variable.[/quote]
Not sure I understand you fully. What do you mean by gravity ?
At least one graviton. Since it has energy, it has mass. Since it has mass, it changes the curvature of spacetime. Thus, it induces a variation of all volumes.
Well, that's classical theory applied to a quantum object. Unfortunately my nearly finished quantum theory of gravity isn't published yet (I got set back by some publisher's requirements concerning width of margins etc... well, maybe larger margins could have saved decades of work to mathematicians, if they had meen applied early enough ; who knows...) anyway, I turned to doing something else in the meanwhile and did not get back to finish that original work. So you'll have to wait for a precise answer.

BTW, you seem to be working in chemistry... there are some differences to number theory and relativity :
* plus or minus one in 33oooooo is not important in chemisrty
* the volume change due to a passing-by graviton can also be neglected
* there is almost never a result consisting in just "true" or "false"
* the "material and methods" (zirconium technology etc) is the main part of the publication ; on GIMPS, it does not matter how you find a factor.
* etc, etc... the role of feeling / intuition, ...

I'd suggest that everybody should publish preferrably in his own speciality...
;-)

[quote=ewmayer;99234][I]I might be movin' to Montana soon
Just to raise me up a crop of Dental Floss
Raisin' it up
Waxin' it down
In a little white box
I can sell uptown[/I][/quote]
Just a Public Service Announcement:

David,

I suggest you organize a symposium/ pancake breakfast in honor of the patron saint of psuedoprimes, St. Alfonso. It's his birthday again this year.

Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.
 

[I]
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.
Scribere proposui de contemptu mundano,
Ut degentes seculi non mulcentur in vano.
Iam est hora surgere a sompno mortis pravo.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Vita brevis breviter in brevi finietur,
Mors venit velociter que neminem veretur,
Omnia mors perimit et nulli miseretur.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Ni conversus fueris et sicut puer factus
Et vitam mutaveris in meliores actus,
Intrare non poteris regnum Dei beatus.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Tuba cum sonuerit, dies erit extrema,
Et iudex advenerit, vocavit sempiterna
Electos in patria, prescitos ad inferna.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Quam felices fuerint, qui cum Christo regnabunt.
Facie ad faciem sic eum adspectabunt,
Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Sabaoth conclamabunt.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Et quam tristes fuerint, qui eterne peribunt,
Pene non deficient, nec propter has obibunt,
Heu, heu, heu, miserrimi, numquam inde exibunt.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Cuncti reges seculi et in mundo magnates
Adventant et clerici omnesque potestates,
Fiant velut parvuli, dimitant vanitates.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Heu, fratres karissimi, si digne contemplemus
Passionem Domini amare et si flemus,
Ut pupillam occuli servabit, ne peccemus.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Alma Virgo Virginum, in celis coronata,
Apud tuum filium sis nobis advocata
Et post hoc exilium ocurrens mediata.
Ad mortem festinamus peccare desistamus.

Vila cadaver eris cur non peccare vereris.
Cur intumescere quearis.
Ut quid peccuniam quearis.
Quid vestes pomposas geris.
Ut quid honores quearis.
Cur non paenitens confiteris.
Contra proximum non laeteris.
[/I]
A sad text, but a very happy song. I like it. It has some strange humour ; first line says: "We are running to our death. Few of us will escape."
(Why I give this text in this thread ? Why not ! Seems today anyone can say nuts in this [B]miscellaneous [/B]"" thread.)
T.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;99246]Just a Public Service Announcement:[/QUOTE]

I do so love a quality single malt (snif!). :TU:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99260]I do so love a quality single malt (snif!). :TU:[/QUOTE]

But that one's missing a few nitrous groups before it'll get you properly blasted.

Alex

The graviton may affect only a portion of space around it depending on its orientation and on its spin. You've seen the cartoons of something sliding down a garden hose making a visible lump as it goes. One view of the graviton is that it travels through space/time in a similar fashion.


Tony,

We had joy, we had fun, we had seasons in the sun, but the joy did not last, like the seasons it did pass. (a song is based on an old french folk ballad)

All we are is dust in the wind. (says a lot about what we humans really are)

Fusion

Prime
 

I have located a prime, as having properties of being what I call a Wilson conjunction, in other words Mersenne.
The prime , 33577307, the Mersenne, 2^(33577307)-1

I'll reply to some of the above ,time permitting.

33577307=257*130651

[quote=Kees;99273]33577307=257*130651[/quote]

A neat riposte.
Has David John Hill jnr heard of Eratosthanes' sieve?

David

Lowest "status unknown" number
 

What is the lowest number whose prime/composite status
is unknown?

David

[QUOTE=davieddy;99279]What is the lowest number whose prime/composite status
is unknown?

David[/QUOTE]1

It is not prime.
It is not composite.

It's like a gravitino in that respect.

Paul

[quote=xilman;99280]1

It is not prime.
It is not composite.

It's like a gravitino in that respect.

Paul[/quote]

What are you on?
I want some of it:)

David

[quote=xilman;99280]1

It is not prime.
It is not composite.

It's like a gravitino in that respect.

Paul[/quote]

Talking of gravitinos, as a physicist with a respect for
Einstein, I never liked the idea of gravitinos on the grounds
that space_time was the background on which quantum
physics messed about, and was somehow "above" all that
nonsense.

David

BTW I thought my question had a well defined answer

[quote=xilman;99280]1

It is not prime.
It is not composite.

It's like a gravitino in that respect.

Paul[/quote]

Why is 1 not considered a prime?

David

[SIZE=1][COLOR=White].[/COLOR][/SIZE][quote=Wikipedia]One is currently considered neither a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number"]prime number[/URL], nor a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_number"]composite number[/URL] - although it used to be considered [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number"]prime[/URL]. Defining a prime as a number that is only divisible by one and itself, one [I]is[/I] a prime. However, for purposes of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factorization"]factorization[/URL] and especially the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorem_of_arithmetic"]fundamental theorem of arithmetic[/URL], it is more convenient to not think of one as a prime factor, or to think of it as an implicit factor that's always there but need not be written down. To exclude the number one from the list of prime numbers, primality is defined as a number having exactly two distinct positive divisors, one and itself. The last professional [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematician"]mathematician[/URL] to publicly label 1 a prime number was [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Lebesgue"]Henri Lebesgue[/URL] in 1899. ([URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan"]Carl Sagan[/URL] included one in a list of prime numbers in his book [I]Contact[/I] in 1985.)[/quote]

[QUOTE=Fusion_power;99266]We had joy, we had fun, we had seasons in the sun, but the joy did not last, like the seasons it did pass. (a song is based on an old french folk ballad)[/QUOTE]Oh yes ! [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasons_in_the_Sun"]Wikipedia [/URL]says about "[URL="http://www.lyricsondemand.com/onehitwonders/seasonsinthesunlyrics.html"]Seasons In The Sun[/URL]" by Terry Jacks: "The song was based on a song called "[URL="http://www.paroles.net/chansons/18746.htm"]Le Moribond[/URL]" ("The Dying Man") by Jacques [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Brel"]Brel [/URL](1961). Not so old since I was 3. I knew this French song when I was a teen-ager and I forgot it then. Very nice ! Thanks to remember me this !
The 2 songs are quite different. Brel's one is sad but it contents humour since the "dying man" talks to the lover of his wife, asking him to take care of her :wink: .
[QUOTE]All we are is dust in the wind. (says a lot about what we humans really are).[/QUOTE]"dust in the wind": nice, but too simple. But I agree: we really are so nothing ...
"a tear in the wind" ?
T.

error misprint
 

Using maple on student edition 35577307 came up prime.
so,2^35577307-1 follows.

On the gravity issue, I am not going into theories of gravity,per se,
beyond suggestinf an extension to boyles law,pv=k, charles law pv/t=k,
to, in regions , especially close to heavy objects, the sun,jupiter,perhaps saturn, that pv/t*d=k (where d is the distance from one detatched regional object, such as comet, or gas ring) might apply.

As far as '1' is concerned, I am not the person to ask.
I do know it is the only number without a 'break' , which is not the right word,when written (1) .

John Hill is insulin dependent, and further lives in a place highly susceptible to magnetic-electrical tampering. I don't know if there are ultrasonic forces present.
Further , whereas paper reflects the light, these computers reflect nothing but emit light out at you, as filtered.Frankly I am not a fan of key boards, and once inspected limit switches,as an occupation, where one pushes a button , to, stop or start the whole works on machinery.Ever try that on
most current computers? Please waite, while the software...... I curse, every time. On means start working. Off means stop.Stop does not mean,
keep going at your leasure till cessation. To me it means, I'm done.

Main point of the entry: correct number , 35577307 .

This is not obviously composite, for a change. The current nofactor file lists
35577307,67

Test it, if it's prime you'll be rich and famous!

Alex

[QUOTE=davieddy;99288]BTW I thought my question had a well defined answer[/QUOTE]It does have a well defined answer, and I gave it to you.

I'll concede I was sloppy in not explicitly stating I was considering only the natural numbers, but given that the question is unanswerable over the integers I hope you'll allow me that degree of imprecision.


Paul

[QUOTE=davieddy;99288]BTW I thought my question had a well defined answer[/QUOTE]It does have a well defined answer, and I gave it to you.

Perhaps you didn't define your question well enough :wink:

I'll concede I was sloppy in not explicitly stating I was considering only the natural numbers, but given that the question is unanswerable over the integers I hope you'll allow me that degree of imprecision.


Paul

[quote=xilman;99317]It does have a well defined answer, and I gave it to you.

Perhaps you didn't define your question well enough :wink:

I'll concede I was sloppy in not explicitly stating I was considering only the natural numbers, but given that the question is unanswerable over the integers I hope you'll allow me that degree of imprecision.


Paul[/quote]

I thought there ought to be a smallest number that had not been tested
as either prime or composite.

Rather like the proof that there are no uninteresting numbers.

The lowest such number would be interesting!

David

[QUOTE=davieddy;99362]I thought there ought to be a smallest number that had not been tested as either prime or composite.[/QUOTE]

A Goldbach verification project at [url]http://www.ieeta.pt/~tos/goldbach.html[/url] had computed all primes below 52*10^16 at the latest update February 19 2007. Computing the next prime would take a small fraction of a second, and computing the next many billions with the sieve of Eratosthenes is very easy (and has probably been done in the 6 days since the page update). There are just too many numbers that are so small that billions more can be tested easily even if increasing intervals have already been tested for many years. Therefore, the question of the smallest untested number is not that interesting to most people, and it's rarely possible to answer precisely.

[QUOTE=T.Rex;99294]Oh yes ! [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasons_in_the_Sun"]T.[/QUOTE]

Well Tony maybe you could help me out.

At our Christmas and new year dances many invited bands signed off at 6 in the morning with a song 'Au revoir'.

This was in the early and late 40's and 50's as an aftermath of WW 2 when the foreign troops were leaving.

I have tried to get the words from the NET but have failed miserably.

It has the same tune but different words in the Song 'Jatondre'. I may be wrong in the spelling.

In English it goes 'Au revoir. Although we're apart, you're in the heart of me.

Say you are ---- and it goes on.

It ends off 'So my sweet, till we meet, Au revoir'

The last dance of the night was very memorable and sentimental to me as that's when one picks up his sweetheart for the last dance of the night.

I think it was originally sung by Edith Piaf and you may be remembering her on the radio.

I will be very obliged if you could somehow give me or translate the words into English.

Sorry I should have PM'd you.

Thanks
Mally.

[QUOTE=mfgoode;99375]Well Tony maybe you could help me out...[/QUOTE]It's quite late now here in France and I do not perfectly understand what you are looking for ...
However, it seems that you are talking about a song with a music like the one sung by Edith Piaf: "J'attendrai" (I will wait).
Here is an [URL="http://sonnerie.01net.com/3-052/fr_fr/1/4503/jattendrai.html"]extract[/URL], and here is the (french) [URL="http://www.parolesmania.com/paroles_jean_sablon_9976/paroles_jattendrai_343966.html"]text[/URL], an old song by Jean Sablon (beg of XXth century I think).
Is this song the one you are looking for ?
I do not have time to translate all the song just now.
It begins by:

I'll wait,
days and nights,
I'll wait for ever you're back
...

Regards,
Tony (seems we can talk about anything in this thread ...)
A link to (nearly) [URL="http://edith-piaf.narod.ru/pesni.html"]all songs by Edith[/URL].

[QUOTE=T.Rex;99394](seems we can talk about anything in this thread ...)
[/QUOTE]

The thread's a train wreck anyway. Have fun.

Alex

[QUOTE=akruppa;99395]The thread's a train wreck anyway. Have fun.[/QUOTE]Further from wikipedia
[quote]English author, son of the Rev. Theophilus Hill, is said to have been born in Peterborough.

He was apprenticed to an apothecary and on the completion of his apprenticeship he set up in a small shop in St Martin's Lane, Westminster. He also travelled over the country in search of rare herbs, with a view to publishing a hortus siccus, but the plan failed. His first publication was a translation of Theophrastus's History of Stones (1746).

From this time forward he was an indefatigable writer. He edited the British Magazine (1746-1750), and for two years (1751-1753) he wrote a daily letter, "The Inspector," for the London Advertiser and Literary Gazette. He also produced novels, plays and scientific works; and was a large contributor to the supplement of Ephraim Chambers's Cyclopaedia.

His personal and scurrilous writings involved him in many quarrels. Henry Fielding attacked him in the Covent Garden Journal, Christopher Smart wrote a mock-epic, The Hilliad, against him, and David Garrick replied to his strictures against him by two epigrams, one of which runs: "For physics and farces, his equal there scarce is; His farces are physic, his physic a farce is."

He had other literary passages-at-arms with John Rich, who accused him of plagiarizing his Orpheus, also with Samuel Foote and Henry Woodward. From 1759 to 1775 he was engaged on a huge botanical work--The Vegetable System (26 vols fol.)--adorned by 1600 copper-plate engravings. Hill's botanical labours were underaken at the request of his patron, Lord Bute, and he was rewarded by the order of Vasa from the king of Sweden in 1774. He had a medical degree from Edinburgh, and he now practised as a quack doctor, making considerable sums by the preparation of vegetable medicines.

Of the seventy-six separate works with which he is credited in the Dictionary of National Biography, the most valuable are those that deal with botany. He is said to have been the author of the second part of The Oeconomy of Human Life (1751), the first part of which is by Lord Chesterfield, and Hannah Glasse's famous manual of cookery was generally ascribed to him (see Boswell, ed. Hill, iii. 285). Dr Johnson said of him that he was "an ingenious man, but had no veracity."[/quote]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99260]I do so love a quality single malt (snif!). :TU:[/QUOTE]My favorite is [URL="http://www.scotchwhisky.com/focus/lagavulin.htm"]Lagavulin[/URL], but I also like [URL="http://www.scotchwhisky.com/focus/talisker.htm"]Talisker[/URL] and [URL="http://www.laphroaig.com/home.asp"]Laphroaig[/URL]. (I saw once a [I]Millésime[/I] Lagavulin, 1989. Very expensive !)
What about you ?
T.

Caol Ila is very smoky and full of taste, but the use sugar color to get it brown:furious: . I'd prefer it it's natural colour.
Anyways, why always Whiskey ? It has much of a hype, in my feeling. I like good Cagnac as well. Last time I had a Cognac in a bar (for 2 Euros, the pricce of a regular Schnaps, I guess they didn't realize what they were selling, because nobody ever orders it), it had so much flavour I felt it litterally replaced a whole meal. Absolutely need to get back there and find out the brand.
H.

BTW: Mr. Hill, where does your avatar come from? I like it so much.

Yours H.

35577307
 

Method of confirmation:
Let p+p'=2^26
Equate : 2^35577307+1=1368358*26
2^35577307=1368358*26-1
Let next number be 2^35577307
Notice (2^35577307-1) +1=2^(35577307)
and 2^35577307-1 is the full set of base 2 numbers to
itself.
Hence 35577307 is a Wilson conjunctive with complement 1.
Hence 2^(35577307)-1 is a mersenne-prime.

Have a good monday

John Hill

2^35577307-1 is the full set of base 2 numbers to
itself.

What does that mean exactly?

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99432]Method of confirmation:
Let p+p'=2^26
Equate : 2^35577307+1=1368358*26
2^35577307=1368358*26-1
Let next number be 2^35577307
Notice (2^35577307-1) +1=2^(35577307)
and 2^35577307-1 is the full set of base 2 numbers to
itself.
Hence 35577307 is a Wilson conjunctive with complement 1.
Hence 2^(35577307)-1 is a mersenne-prime.

Have a good monday

John Hill[/QUOTE]

Total Gibberish.

> Equate : 2^35577307+1=1368358*26

Hm, I don't think this equality holds. And not a close miss, either.

Alex

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99432]Hence 2^(35577307)-1 is a mersenne-prime.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=akruppa;99313]This is not obviously composite, for a change. The current nofactor file lists
35577307,67[/QUOTE]

"Even a blind cat catches a mouse now and then."

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;99434]Total Gibberish.[/QUOTE]

Ah, but for once, DJH has provided some eminently *refutable* gibberish. Anyone care to demolish this one via direct LL test? Is it already assigned?

Ha ha, "The Hilliad" - thanks for the link, Alex.

I have an LL test finishing Friday- I'll substitute 35577307 in for my next reserved exponent if no one else takes care of it and/or if its not already reserved. It will take about a month on my machine, however.

Norm

As it is not on the current "assigned" list can we not assume it has already been tested? It is not on the current "cleared" list but is there any way to check the previous cleared lists? Is there a "complete" database somewhere of all the Mersenne exponents and their current state?

[QUOTE=akruppa;99435]> Equate : 2^35577307+1=1368358*26

Hm, I don't think this equality holds. And not a close miss, either.

Alex[/QUOTE]

A lot has been left out.
35577307+1=35577308
1368358*26=35577308


This about where my initial juggling of the multiples of 2^26, to p candidates between
2^5 and 2^6 got me, as to narrow the gap, for one potentially applicable
prime. I found others(primes) first , that were obviously not going to form a conjunction, but which did give some idea which way to go, to find a closed gap.

Next:
2^(1368358*26)=2^(35577307+1) (Correct?)
Next: 2^(1368358*26-1368358*26)=1368358*26(2^0) (correct?)

I am still equating multiples of 2^26, and finally take out 26.
Next refutation,?

To note: The process is just to have a linear connection at this point.
One in fact that will hold 2^35577307 to count.

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99451]
2^(1368358*26)=2^(35577307+1) (Correct?)
[/QUOTE]

Jup.

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99451]
Next: 2^(1368358*26-1368358*26)=1368358*26(2^0) (correct?)
[/QUOTE]

Nope.

Alex

[QUOTE=Spherical Cow;99444]I have an LL test finishing Friday- I'll substitute 35577307 in for my next reserved exponent if no one else takes care of it and/or if its not already reserved. [/QUOTE]

M35577307 has had one LL test - not prime. You are welcome to do an early double-check.

[QUOTE=Prime95;99453]M35577307 has had one LL test - not prime. You are welcome to do an early double-check.[/QUOTE]

Ouch. :devil: :w00t: :flex: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[quote=petrw1;99448]As it is not on the current "assigned" list can we not assume it has already been tested? It is not on the current "cleared" list but is there any way to check the previous cleared lists? Is there a "complete" database somewhere of all the Mersenne exponents and their current state?[/quote]You could think of the "assigned" and "cleared" lists as the _PrimeNet_ status of [I]assignments[/I], rather than the status of exponents. At each database synchronization, those lists are purged of assignments for which there is no longer need to be kept track.

In contrast, the _GIMPS_ status of exponents resides in the nofactor, hrf3, lucas_v, factors, Pminus1 and BAD files. To find whether an exponent has ever been LL-tested, check hrf3 and lucas_v (except that for tests whose residues didn't match after a triple-check, and thus are considered not acceptable, look in the BAD file if those are of interest). Synchronizations don't purge any of these files.

The nofactor file contains exponents that have been trial-factored at least once but have not yet been proven to be a Mersenne prime nor have had a factor found.

The hrf3 file contains exponents that have been LL-tested at least once but have not yet had a matching residue from a doublecheck nor have had a factor found.

The lucas_v file contains exponents that have been LL-tested at least twice with matching residues but have not yet been proven to be a Mersenne prime (i.e., the residues were nonzero) nor have had a factor found.

The factors file contains exponents for which a factor [I]has[/I] been found.

Chartreuse
 

[QUOTE=hhh;99425]Anyways, why always Whiskey ?[/QUOTE]Sure. In Grenoble, we have the "[URL="http://www.chartreuse.fr/"]Chartreuse[/URL]", made with plants. Green one is the best. Done by monks living in the Chartreuse mountain. Quite strange and very strong !
T.

[QUOTE=T.Rex;99461]Sure. In Grenoble, we have the "[URL="http://www.chartreuse.fr/"]Chartreuse[/URL]", made with plants. Green one is the best. Done by monks living in the Chartreuse mountain. Quite strange and very strong !
T.[/QUOTE]

And speaking of strange and strong green herbal spirits, as the saying goes:

[i]"Absinthe makes the heart grow fonder."[/i]

(Not sure if that works for Jägermeister, too - I shall have to perform an experiment to test this.)

[QUOTE=akruppa;99452]Jup.



Nope.

Alex[/QUOTE]

AS (2^1368358*26)/(2^1368358*26)=1 so 1368358*26 represents the multiples of 2^26 .
As far as transferring the 1 it gets 2^p in its form.
I have made the assumption 2^p sufficiently defined.
An exact solution of the 2^26 part or not might be be possible,but the time consumption would prohibit demonstration of this method till much later.
Meanwhile the correlation of 1 , has some merit to look at.
There is some parallel, as suggested earlier , to calculus of variations.
There is no doubt in my mind, that a factorial difference can be transformed to a linear variable, and for only two primes at a time
compared .I have drawings making matters easier to perceive, but not in a condition to transmit across the computer.
Ideally , an exact match on the spot is preferable, but I'm not willing to state that this type CANNOT work.
I could suggest some might look to between 2^6 and 2^7, its actually a lot of fun ,using wise constraints.Finding , not a|1|, difference , but on the nose 'o', would be great.Once I had some idea by observation where to start,
exchanging p and p' terms to get to 35577307 took about 2hrs.
Rhetorically , how many combinations of those numbers are there?How long does a chess game last, among humans?

:oolong:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99472][i]"Absinthe makes the heart grow fonder."[/i][/QUOTE]Try it without any water, that's wonderful !
T.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99472]And speaking of strange and strong green herbal spirits, as the saying goes:

[i]"Absinthe makes the heart grow fonder."[/i]

(Not sure if that works for Jägermeister, too - I shall have to perform an experiment to test this.)[/QUOTE]You got it wrong!

Absinthe makes the [b]tart[/b] grow fonder.


Paul

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99472]And speaking of strange and strong green herbal spirits, as the saying goes:

[i]"Absinthe makes the heart grow fonder."[/i]

(Not sure if that works for Jägermeister, too - I shall have to perform an experiment to test this.)[/QUOTE]

Yeah that's a new one for me Thanks!

Absinthe AFAIK eventually leads to insanity. Hence to complete the phrase

'and the mind wander'

If Ja'germeister means what I am thinking. Don't try the experiment! You will be disappointed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhh
Anyways, why always Whiskey ?

Sure. In Grenoble, we have the "Chartreuse", made with plants. Green one is the best. Done by monks living in the Chartreuse mountain. Quite strange and very strong !
T.

Yeah! I have tried Chartreuse many times, a mini bottle at a time, both the green and pale varieties

Personally I prefer Drambuie with a scotch base. Try it with coffee, its great!

Benedictine is also good made by the Benedictine monks. Strong and potent.

Their logo is impressive! D.O.M. which stands for Deo Optima Maximus- God is great! I must make it my mantra. Correct me if I'm wrong as its from pure memory .

Well here are a few trivial well known ones

Brandy makes one randy ! Whisky makes one frisky.

Gin tempts you to sin.

Rum is good for her -

I might as well put this down though rather risque'

This is how a radio announcer ended his programme when the time was up.

'When apples are ripe they are ready for plucking,
When girls are sixteen they are ready for -- Good bye folks !

As you may have expected - he got the sack!

Mally

[QUOTE=T.Rex;99461]Sure. In Grenoble, we have the "[URL="http://www.chartreuse.fr/"]Chartreuse[/URL]", made with plants. Green one is the best. Done by monks living in the Chartreuse mountain. Quite strange and very strong !
T.[/QUOTE]
Got to try that one out.



Gentian (Deutsch: Enzian) is IMO one of the bizzarest drinks on earth. The bouquet - well I would say - it stinks. :huh: Once you got the smallest drop on your tongue, it changes completely and is as smooth as you can imagine. :rolleyes: I have no idea what happens to the sense of taste with that.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_artichoke"]Topinambur[/URL] is a particular potatoe/artichok/sunflower/whatever that transforms into a very fruity Schnaps as well.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99472]
(Not sure if that works for Jägermeister, too - I shall have to perform an experiment to test this.)[/QUOTE]
Friends don't let friends drink gasoline.

jasonp

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99473]blah blah blah...[/QUOTE]

Sing along with me now:

[i]My credibility is now less than zero,
Yes, I'm a Misc.-Maths forum hero...[/i]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99516]Sing along with me now:

[i]My credibility is now less than zero,
Yes, I'm a Misc.-Maths forum hero...[/i][/QUOTE]Oh come on now, don't be harsh. In the electronic village of mersenneforum.org, he's taking on a traditional and valuable role.

Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;99520]Oh come on now, don't be harsh. In the electronic village of mersenneforum.org, he's taking on a traditional and valuable role.

Paul[/QUOTE]

And I'll bet that he doesn't remotely look like Danny Kaye.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99516]Sing along with me now:

[i]My credibility is now less than zero,
Yes, I'm a Misc.-Maths forum hero...[/i][/QUOTE]

DJ Ernst, gimme a beat!

Uhh!

the mish mash of misc.-maths' missed paths criss-crossed
like wrist watches sold on the street, you hold no credibility
that doesn't make you incredible, just lacking stability
but you pack a lackluster ability to mimic senility
We'll just pretend that you tend to post like it's a prank
but at the end of the day we all know what to say,
"He's just another mother****ing crank"

Yo, TravisT, what up, my brother?

Ha ha, "Cranksta Rap."

"Cranks apart"

Oops, wrong thread...

[QUOTE=BlisteringSheep;99619]"Cranks apart"

Oops, wrong thread...[/QUOTE]

I don't think is anything which could possibly be seen as "wrong" in this particular thread, given the baseline here.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99609]Yo, TravisT, what up, my brother?

Ha ha, "Cranksta Rap."[/QUOTE]

:lol: nice

[QUOTE=Prime95;99453]M35577307 has had one LL test - not prime. You are welcome to do an early double-check.[/QUOTE]

At the risk of being "on topic", I'll do the double-check of this starting Friday, and perhaps allow this prime to rest in peace.

Norm

[QUOTE=ewmayer;99609]Yo, TravisT, what up, my brother?

Ha ha, "Cranksta Rap."[/QUOTE]The "ranksta" is silent, of course.

This has been a public service announcement.


Paul

Hell, I've been missing a great deal of progress in this discussion !

First, and foremost (since the "possible prime" is still unconfirmed) :

[quote=T.Rex;99461]Sure. In Grenoble, we have the "[URL="http://www.chartreuse.fr/"]Chartreuse[/URL]", made with plants. Green one is the best. Done by monks living in the Chartreuse mountain. Quite strange and very strong !
T.[/quote]

I '''strongly''' +1 the green Chartreuse. Nothing compares to that.

[quote]
AS (2^1368358*26)/(2^1368358*26)=1 so 1368358*26 represents the multiples of 2^26 .
[/quote]I don't understand the proposition P = "1368358*26 represents the multiples of 2^26"
so I cannot evaluate the truth of your statement (which is of the form " TRUE => P "
and as such equivalent to P)
[quote]
As far as transferring the 1 it gets 2^p in its form.
I have made the assumption 2^p sufficiently defined.
An exact solution of the 2^26 part or not might be be possible,but the time consumption would prohibit demonstration of this method till much later.
Meanwhile the correlation of 1 , has some merit to look at.
There is some parallel, as suggested earlier , to calculus of variations.
There is no doubt in my mind, that a factorial difference can be transformed to a linear variable, and for only two primes at a time
compared .
[/quote]as to the above, I dont understand anything, and I doubt anyone can.
[quote]
I have drawings making matters easier to perceive, but not in a condition to transmit across the computer.
[/quote]too bad, since "ein Bild spricht mehr als tausend Worte." (but there seem to exist counter-examples when applied to mathematical proofs...)
[quote]
Ideally , an exact match on the spot is preferable, but I'm not willing to state that this type CANNOT work.
[/quote]well in number theory, exact matches are indeed preferred and the negation of "this cannot work" unfortunately is not "this works".
[quote]
Finding , not a|1|, difference , but on the nose 'o', would be great.Once I had some idea by observation where to start,
exchanging p and p' terms to get to 35577307 took about 2hrs.
Rhetorically , how many combinations of those numbers are there?How long does a chess game last, among humans?[/quote]on the average, much shorter than an LL test in the 35M region.
and, once again, this whole mersenne stuff is about the +/- 1 being there - in this sense, a +/-1 difference is not close to zero, but exactly at the opposite end
(2^N has N+1 factors, while 2^N-1 or 2^N+1 MAY not have any factor)

On 35577307
 

At the moment , by x-1, I have a conjunction, the only thing I am looking at
is to what?
(x=35577307)
as (2^(2^p-1)-2)! is what I am looking at.A pseudo would be elimated or confirmed.As eliminated,x is prime.

For similar cases , look at both 521 and 607,(listed Mersennes) however the narrowing is in the reverse direction for one.

[quote=David John Hill Jr;99804](x=35577307)
(...) x is prime.[/quote]
true.

As to the rest, I must be the one for whom narrowing is in the reverse direction...

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr;99804]At the moment , by x-1, I have a conjunction ...[/QUOTE]

Conjunction Junction, what's your function?

Dysfunction compunction, needs some unction...

Question, a bit of a reply
 

I have included a text file. I sometimes, now divide also by (p+p'-2).to line up
with p-1 so as it has to be stated which form is being applied.
See conjunc.txt

[quote=David John Hill Jr;100194]I have included a text file. I sometimes, now divide also by (p+p'-2).to line up with p-1 so as it has to be stated which form is being applied.
See conjunc.txt[/quote]
I would like to know the guy who feeds the replies into megahal (sorry if I misname your program - if you PM me some info I'll shup up here) and pastes the replies alternatively into a txt file or on the forum. To which extend did you automatize this process?

Something on my procedure
 

Firstly , the txt. was written on Notepad ,offline , in a few hours, largely from
handwritten notes, and as as soon as complete I entered forum time.(Much as one would write a letter.)
In general, I have a Scientific workplace software, which is messy to transcribe to .txt, with the software I have, and so, as the subject matter
did not require extreme notation , I decided to write on notepad. In order to find , or sort to find , I use my hand notes along with Scientific Workplace.
Currently ,that is the extent of my research on the topic.

[QUOTE=Prime95;99453]M35577307 has had one LL test - not prime. You are welcome to do an early double-check.[/QUOTE]



Just to put a final nail in this one, the early double-check of M35577307 just finished.

News Flash: It is still not prime.

Norm

Sounds good
 

I have two other prime numbers , both of which are probably not mersenne prime, as expanded.
627210209=20907007*30-1
and 231695603=8274843*28-1 .
An identity to test:
(K is a natural number)
K(2^p-1)=[(2^p-2)!+2^(p+1)]-1
In the case of 30, 2| only once , which puts the equation in the wrong position to be 2^p-1+1.
In the case of 26,the multiple of 26 is even which makes it difficult to determine, as in the 30 one above.
The case of the 28, has 4 | which is acceptable position wise.
Glad results are in.

identity expanded.
 

While the difficulty of working with very large numbers remains the same,
I have juggled the identity for mersennes,and reworded.
It is interesting to me to note that given p, that p+p'-1 is the 2^(peak+1)-1 .
Meanwhile I have put this in derive, whereby one simply plugs in the values,
and further manipulating the identity to either comes up with 0 or 1,
only when x and 2^x-1 are prime.Else a fraction occurs.

Applying the identity.
 

A copy of the derive program, with manual substitution.

?
 

How is that last one a "program"?

A better file
 

In 'program' ,what I have actually done is calculate K(a) first(so as to be a natural number-if a primes occuring) by plugging in 2^x-1. Then I have reinserted K(a) , to come up with 2^p-1,with tests to ensure K(a) was a natural number to produce such. Derive has simplified some of the algebra
on its own.
This is not a program in an executible form, however in derive I can call it up as a file and substitute different values for x without changing the equation structures. Call it a manual program,in an elementary sense,if you will.
See extended work on Mersimi.txt

67092511
 

given the prime 67092511
I notice the only common factor between 67092510 and 67092512 IS
and is only 2^1,
which I believe should give the fermat form the integrity needed to have
composites and pseodo's ignored.

This is true for all even integers [I]n[/I] and [I]n[/I]+2. Any integer that divides both must divide the difference, which is 2.

Alex

Good property
 

Thanks Alex.
A good property to keep in mind this 2008.
I had noticed that in the case of the last 10 mersennes, most
had very few different factors in both cases, while in the few
with a larger number of different factors in the one case , were limited
in the other case .

Curious prime
 

67092511
While I only recently discovered it,it seems possible to me it was used as a key in the 9/11 attack on the U.S.
No progress to show on its Mersenne generating capability.
J.H.

Spherical cow, is 'Norm' your real name?