mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-11-15, 19:27   #23
Greebley
 
Greebley's Avatar
 
May 2009
Dedham Massachusetts USA

3×281 Posts
Default

Actually the article you quoted just above has an interesting point. Since we are asking if an ODD number is prime, then the chances are twice as high as a random number which could be even.

I therefore think the above posts might be incorrect in their estimates by a factor of 2 and the chance of prime for a 100 digit odd number is 1/115 and the chance of gaining the down driver is therefore 1/230.

Does that make sense?
Greebley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-11-15, 20:22   #24
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

2×33×109 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greebley View Post
Actually the article you quoted just above has an interesting point. Since we are asking if an ODD number is prime, then the chances are twice as high as a random number which could be even.

I therefore think the above posts might be incorrect in their estimates by a factor of 2 and the chance of prime for a 100 digit odd number is 1/115 and the chance of gaining the down driver is therefore 1/230.

Does that make sense?
it does to me
the same thing had crossed my mind earlier

can anyone say whether my guess at the formula when including trialfactoring is correct or not?
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-12-22, 13:47   #25
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

2×33×109 Posts
Default

Possible driver/guide acquisitions:
Code:
Driver       When p is
2^2 * 7      25 mod 56
2^3 * 5      37 mod 80
2^4 * 31     493 mod 992
2^5 * 7      221 mod 448
2^6 * 127    8125 mod 16256
Drivers and guides containing a 3 can't be obtained since 3 divides \sigma(2).
The remaining factors of the next iteration can also be worked out. For example:
The 2^2 * 7 driver is generated from 2*p by p = 56n+25. The remaining factors of the next iteration are the factors of 2n+1.
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-05-11, 15:43   #26
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
Possible driver/guide acquisitions:
Code:
Driver       When p is
2^2 * 7      25 mod 56
2^3 * 5      37 mod 80
2^4 * 31     493 mod 992
2^5 * 7      221 mod 448
2^6 * 127    8125 mod 16256
Drivers and guides containing a 3 can't be obtained since 3 divides \sigma(2).
The remaining factors of the next iteration can also be worked out. For example:
The 2^2 * 7 driver is generated from 2*p by p = 56n+25. The remaining factors of the next iteration are the factors of 2n+1.
though I've already PM'd this, is it always that p\equiv {<driver>-3} \text{ mod } {2 \time {<driver>}}

Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2011-05-11 at 15:44
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-05-12, 15:53   #27
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

2×33×109 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
though I've already PM'd this, is it always that p\equiv {<driver>-3} \text{ mod } {2 \time {<driver>}}
Sorry I misunderstood your pm and meant to go back to thinking about it later.
It seems that that is the case but I can't see why. Can anyone produce a proof?
It works the same for 2*5(not a driver or guide). 2*5 requires 7 mod 20. Even 2*5*7 follows the rule 67 mod 140 so it isn't just one factor other than 2 in the driver.
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-05-12, 20:54   #28
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

2·33·109 Posts
Default

If the starting iteration is 2*p then the second iteration is 2p+3 which means than whatever we want the second iteration to be divisible by must divide 2p+3. which is what causes the noticed effect. Working backwards from any iteration with a possible downdriver on the previous iteration to the value of p for that iteration is p=((current iteration)-3)/2. Quite simple really when I thought for a while.
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-05-12, 23:48   #29
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

2·47·101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
If the starting iteration is 2*p then the second iteration is 2p+3 which means ...
If the starting iteration is 2*p, then the second iteration is p+3
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm losing faith in my influence... seba2122 Prime Sierpinski Project 2 2015-07-22 23:46
Nice large downdriver capture fivemack Aliquot Sequences 3 2013-08-07 18:49
Beginning driver/downdriver questions biwema Aliquot Sequences 6 2011-08-22 20:41
Losing Downguide henryzz Aliquot Sequences 5 2010-02-10 22:42
GIMPS losing popularity? ixfd64 Lounge 8 2003-11-15 00:09

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:58.


Mon Aug 2 11:58:18 UTC 2021 up 10 days, 6:27, 0 users, load averages: 1.53, 1.66, 1.42

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.