New PRP found

ltd · 2008-07-27, 18:26

Sloth did it again.

we have a new PRP. Its 258317*2^5450519+1

Official proving is in progress:

http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85350

As we have rechecked the number on two different machines already(Thanks to Joe_O) we are quite sure that it is really prime.

So the k is removed from all queues and a new sieving dat file is created and can be downloaded at the usual place.

Thanks to all the contributors here and at primegrid who made it possible to find a new prime within such a short time.

Stats will show it as soon as the prime is official.

mdettweiler · 2008-07-27, 20:08

Hmm...since it was done with LLR (which does a Proth test, not a PRP test, on k*2^n+1 numbers), shouldn't the title say "new prime found" instead of "new PRP found" (since "PRP" would indicate that it's only a probable prime)?

Wacky · 2008-07-27, 21:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

shouldn't the title say "new prime found" instead of "new PRP found" (since "PRP" would indicate that it's only a probable prime)?

No, it is still "probable" until they complete all of the verification tests that they feel are necessary to assure that there was not an error in the computation which might have led to a false positive.

mdettweiler · 2008-07-27, 22:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wacky

No, it is still "probable" until they complete all of the verification tests that they feel are necessary to assure that there was not an error in the computation which might have led to a false positive.

Well, since they've already checked it three times by now, I'd say the chances of it being composite are just about nil.

Wacky · 2008-07-27, 22:32

I don't disagree with your assessment. However, WE are not in a position to make a declaration. I am sure that THEY will amend their declaration when THEY are ready.

ltd · 2008-07-28, 17:36

There are three reasons why I wrote PRP.
First and most important it was a reflex comming from the start of the project when everything was PRP and had to be rechecked by other programms.

Second I think it is worth to call it PRP until it is checked by an independant source using different tools.

Third I never really thought about the wording.

Nekto · 2008-07-28, 20:37

Good job!

axn · 2008-07-29, 04:02

Sigh. I know I've said it many times before, but... Y'all need to better coordinate with Prof. Caldwell so that such BIG primes are not verified by prime pages again -- it achieves nothing more than tying up the prime pages machines.

Oh, and big congrats to everyone

Jean Penné · 2008-07-29, 04:45

Many congrats to everyone! I think you are now really competing with SoB...
Best Regards,
Jean

Death · 2008-07-29, 07:23

Nice to hear! You guys are the best!

That's mean not only new prime, but also overall speed increase in sieving.

Now I want new prime in SoB ))))

Death · 2008-07-29, 07:25

And btw, everybody can grab some primality check program and check it by yourself. ;-)

2008-07-27, 18:26	#1
ltd Apr 2003 1404₈ Posts	New PRP found Sloth did it again. we have a new PRP. Its 2583172^5450519+1 Official proving is in progress: http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=85350 As we have rechecked the number on two different machines already(Thanks to Joe_O) we are quite sure that it is really prime. So the k is removed from all queues and a new sieving dat file is created and can be downloaded at the usual place. Thanks to all the contributors here and at primegrid who made it possible to find a new prime within such a short time. Stats will show it as soon as the prime is official. Last fiddled with by ltd on 2008-07-27 at 18:27*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Factor found that should have been found by P-1	tha	Data	65	2020-08-05 21:11
found one! what do I do now?	jord161	PrimeNet	10	2018-06-22 21:57
found before ?	science_man_88	Twin Prime Search	27	2010-05-05 16:24
Found something here	em99010pepe	ElevenSmooth	8	2006-01-02 10:12
M42 found?	Unregistered	Data	1	2005-02-19 18:20

2008-07-27, 20:08	#2
mdettweiler A Sunny Moo Aug 2007 USA (GMT-5) 3·2,083 Posts	Hmm...since it was done with LLR (which does a Proth test, not a PRP test, on k*2^n+1 numbers), shouldn't the title say "new prime found" instead of "new PRP found" (since "PRP" would indicate that it's only a probable prime)?

2008-07-27, 22:32	#5
Wacky Jun 2003 The Texas Hill Country 10001000001₂ Posts	I don't disagree with your assessment. However, WE are not in a position to make a declaration. I am sure that THEY will amend their declaration when THEY are ready.

2008-07-28, 17:36	#6
ltd Apr 2003 2²·193 Posts	There are three reasons why I wrote PRP. First and most important it was a reflex comming from the start of the project when everything was PRP and had to be rechecked by other programms. Second I think it is worth to call it PRP until it is checked by an independant source using different tools. Third I never really thought about the wording.

2008-07-29, 04:02	#8
axn Jun 2003 11673₈ Posts	Sigh. I know I've said it many times before, but... Y'all need to better coordinate with Prof. Caldwell so that such BIG primes are not verified by prime pages again -- it achieves nothing more than tying up the prime pages machines. Oh, and big congrats to everyone

2008-07-29, 04:45	#9
Jean Penné May 2004 FRANCE 2²·5·29 Posts	Many congrats to everyone! I think you are now really competing with SoB... Best Regards, Jean

2008-07-29, 07:23	#10
Death Mar 2004 Ukraine, Kiev 101110₂ Posts	Nice to hear! You guys are the best! That's mean not only new prime, but also overall speed increase in sieving. Now I want new prime in SoB ))))

2008-07-29, 07:25	#11
Death Mar 2004 Ukraine, Kiev 2E₁₆ Posts	And btw, everybody can grab some primality check program and check it by yourself. ;-)