Riesel/Sierp #'s for bases 3, 7, and 15

[robert44444uk]

For Robert Gerbicz

Robert: Is there a way you can have a "autosave" file with the program?

I am still wading through base 3, but I get stuck on covering sets where the size of the set has a lot of factors, like 336 (programme running for 2 days so far)

If I get a power cut longer than my battery capacity, then I will lose and have to start over.

No improvements to those already posted noted to date, but I skipped a couple of long running numbers because of power cuts.

[em99010pepe]

What about a reservation thread? I would like to join the fun because I don't know who is running what! Thank you.

[robert44444uk]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

I agree with this. The new Riesel base 3 value for the project is now 63064644938. Proof:
Gary

This values for this and the Riesel were discovered by Klasson in Sept 2004 - see

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/p...m/message/4698
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/p...m/message/4708

The post 4713 suggests the Riesel might indeed be the minimum, checked to multiplicative order 200.

[robert44444uk]

Originally Posted by robert44444uk

This values for this and the Riesel were discovered by Klasson in Sept 2004 - see

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/p...m/message/4698
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/p...m/message/4708

The post 4713 suggests the Riesel might indeed be the minimum, checked to multiplicative order 200.

Ooops , should have read post 11 here first!!!

[robert44444uk]

Originally Posted by robert44444uk

also other Sierpinskis
base 7, k value 162643669672445
base 15, 91218919470156
base 71, 5917678826

Sierpinski 7 result 1112646039348

Covering 24-set 19,5,43,13,181,1201,73,193 in positions 1,3,2,12,6,1,5,21

Don't know how Chris Caldwell's students missed this one

[henryzz]

Originally Posted by robert44444uk

Sierpinski 7 result 1112646039348

Covering 24-set 19,5,43,13,181,1201,73,193 in positions 1,3,2,12,6,1,5,21

Don't know how Chris Caldwell's students missed this one

read post 54

[robert44444uk]

Originally Posted by henryzz

read post 54

Thanks Henryzz, should pay more attention. Age catching up with me!!

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by KEP

Regarding the Riesel Base 3:

I'm not going to take the Riesel Base 3 above k=500,000,000. So for fairness I'm unreserving all k above 500M and keeping my reservation for all k<=500M. It has turned out to involve a great bit more work than I nescessarialy is willing to provide, and also a fact is if I'm going to complete all k's stated by the conjecture for now, the conjecture want be taken to n<=25K for all k's for at least 15-30 years from now.

Now some timings: Expect every 100 million k's to take up about 1 month of computation time.

But to sum up, the Riesel Base 3 is now availeable for everyone for k>500M. Thanks for understanding.

In case you may wonder what else I'm going to do, I will most likely spend the next 3-4 month working on the base 19 sierpinski. And maybe once I complete my reservation for Base 19 sierpinski I might extend it if further k's remain. Else I will propably do something else usefull

Take care everyone.

Kenneth!

OK, I'll note this on the reservations page.

I told you finding millions of small primes would get boring after a while!

Since this involves reservations, I'll move it over to the reservations thread. We're using this thread for discussion about the conjecture values.

Thanks for the update and good luck on Sierp base 19! It may turn out to take more total CPU time than Riesel base 3 because it's not a very prime base.


Gary

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by em99010pepe

What about a reservation thread? I would like to join the fun because I don't know who is running what! Thank you.

Carlos,

What would you like a reservations thread for?

Are you referring to the search of lower conjectured values using the new software introduced here? If so, I could probably set up something for that.


Gary

[em99010pepe]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Carlos,

Are you referring to the search of lower conjectured values using the new software introduced here? If so, I could probably set up something for that.

Gary

Yep, a better organization can bring more power to the game.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by em99010pepe

Yep, a better organization can bring more power to the game.

I'm strongly suspecting that we now have the lowest conjectured values with numeric covering sets now for all bases < 32 on both sides now but of course we can't be sure. I agree we should continue with the new software to see if there are any lower values.

Everyone, can you please report what bases, k-ranges, and exponents that you have tested using the new software? Also, please state what ranges you'd like to 'reserve' for future searching.

I'll come up with a coordinated reservation process for it.


Gary