![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
"Michael Kwok"
Mar 2006
22358 Posts |
TPS is now on n=483585, and no prime has been found since n=482995. Is this normal, or should some of the n=482995-483585 range be doublechecked?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA
2×47×67 Posts |
It's definitely unexpected, but still possible. There's about 19,000 candidates in that range, which at sieve depth p=3P has an expected 3.6 primes (odds of one or more prime 97.2%). That leaves a 3% chance of not finding any primes in that range, which is rare but does happen on occasion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
May 2004
New York City
102138 Posts |
I suspect that a Covering Set of Titanic Numbers might
move this problem into the past. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
May 2010
499 Posts |
We've finally ended the prime-free gap. 98883*2^483634-1 is prime (but not twin).
|
|
|
|