Report top-5000 primes here

[kar_bon]

A new Riesel-Base-5 prime was just verified: 45742*5^303011-1.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

A new Riesel-Base-5 prime was just verified: 45742*5^303011-1.

Excellent! Nice to see the base 5 project get one.

The good part is that even though it's an odd exponent, since the k is low, it eliminates k*5 from Riesel base 25 with:

228710*25^151505-1 is prime

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Excellent! Nice to see the base 5 project get one.

The good part is that even though it's an odd exponent, since the k is low, it eliminates k*5 from Riesel base 25 with:

228710*25^151505-1 is prime

Speaking of which, I wonder why it hasn't been mentioned at the base 5 project itself yet? Also, their webpage hasn't updated to account for the new prime...I thought it was automatic though perhaps it isn't for primes.

Also, I noticed that the prime was reported as found with "PRP" instead of "LLR"--presumably, then, the old LLRnet (and therefore LLR 3.5 which was still reasonably close enough to PRP's old code to be reported as that) was used instead of the new LLRnet or manual LLR, which would be reported with the "LLR" proof code. Considering the humongous speed penalty involved in using the older LLRnet for base 5, this is definitely quite a find. I'm surprised the person who found it hasn't upgraded yet.

[kar_bon]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

I'm surprised the person who found it hasn't upgraded yet.

I think, he only used the old prover-code: it's the third Base-5 prime for him/this code.

The Riesel-Base-5 Stats shows 'rover' under "PRP Stats" with last results for 2010-04-28, but no new prime found (on top: "Days since last prime: 624" and bottom-table with open k-values no prime, too).

[Siemelink]

Tralala:

Primality testing 25679*36^98885-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 5, base 1+sqrt(5)
25679*36^98885-1 is prime! (8375.2145s+0.0123s)

Submitted too, Willem.

[Batalov]

Originally Posted by Siemelink

Primality testing 25679*36^98885-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 5, base 1+sqrt(5)
25679*36^98885-1 is prime! (8375.2145s+0.0123s)

This one, below, is not top-5000, but just on the heels of your message, played with that R36 k-list:
15572*6^50383-1 is 3-PRP! (30.6225s+0.0014s)
In other words
93432*36^25191-1 is 3-PRP! (30.6225s+0.0014s)
...maybe, I'll take some of these k's...

[gd_barnes]

Nice find Willem.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Batalov

This one, below, is not top-5000, but just on the heels of your message, played with that R36 k-list:
15572*6^50383-1 is 3-PRP! (30.6225s+0.0014s)
In other words
93432*36^25191-1 is 3-PRP! (30.6225s+0.0014s)
...maybe, I'll take some of these k's...

Be sure and let me know which k's you are taking.

Base 36, like base 6, is a fairly "prime" base. To clarify: Many of its k's are going to be heavier weight than a lot of bases.

[mdettweiler]

I just noticed that the instructions in the first post of this thread said to report PRPs found with LLR and proven with PFGW with the PRP proof code. The currently accepted practice is to report them with the LLR code, since by now the code involved in doing PRP tests with LLR (even that for 3.7.1c which actually did PRP tests instead of 3.8's N-1/N+1's) has changed enough that it doesn't really make sense to credit the old PRP. I've changed the instructions accordingly (Gary, just wanted to give you a heads-up on this).

Edit: I just realized that, ironically enough, I was the one to first change it to PRP back in post #11 of this thread. The discussion that ensued clarified that it really should be LLR, but somehow it never got changed back.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by mdettweiler

I just noticed that the instructions in the first post of this thread said to report PRPs found with LLR and proven with PFGW with the PRP proof code. The currently accepted practice is to report them with the LLR code, since by now the code involved in doing PRP tests with LLR (even that for 3.7.1c which actually did PRP tests instead of 3.8's N-1/N+1's) has changed enough that it doesn't really make sense to credit the old PRP. I've changed the instructions accordingly (Gary, just wanted to give you a heads-up on this).

Edit: I just realized that, ironically enough, I was the one to first change it to PRP back in post #11 of this thread. The discussion that ensued clarified that it really should be LLR, but somehow it never got changed back.

Well, you oughta change it back again. lol

[MyDogBuster]

http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=93045

648*43^194123+1 is prime

This leaves 166*43^n+1 the only k left for the conjecture.

k=166 will be added to the 1 k remaining thread. It has been tested to n=194.1K also.