Share N+/-1 Primality Proofs - Page 5

wblipp · 2012-01-01, 20:13

A fun start for the new year: searching among somewhat larger PRPs, I spotted the Wagstaff Prime (2^5807+1)/3. Wagstaff primes are especially attractive for these proofs because N+1 and N-1 are Cunningham numbers with different exponents, increasing the likelihood that one of them has lots of algebraic factors. Like most of the proofs I feature in this thread, this one was missing algebraic factors from one side. This hints that a systematic check of Wagstaff Primes may turn up more easily completed proofs in the factordb. The exponents for Wagstaff Primes are OEIS Sequence 978

wblipp · 2012-01-03, 15:36

I found another of these (2^n +/- a)/b PRPs where a+b or a-b is a power of 2, leading to sufficient algebraic factors for an N+1 or N-1 proof. Today's example was from near the clearing edge of PRPs: (2^4601+7)/39

wblipp · 2012-01-11, 04:15

I guess I've not inspired others to browse the PRP list for easy targets. I found this one among the 50 smallest PRPs.

(10^1410*74-11)/63 - the N-1 cancels the 74, leaving lots of algebraic factors for 10^1410-1.

Batalov · 2012-01-11, 05:24

(10^3258-73)/9 via a p1057 and some algebra in N+1

...and (10^12891+11)/3 with N-1 (these are some old toys)

Stargate38 · 2012-01-13, 00:44

2*911³⁸¹+1 via N-1. It's the only prime of the form 2*911ⁿ+1 that I've found, other than 1823. I used the factor tables. Here's the link to the table (Near Cunningham):

http://www.factordb.com/index.php?qu...at=1&sent=Show

wblipp · 2012-01-13, 04:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stargate38

It's the only prime of the for 2*911ⁿ+1 that I've found, other than 1823. I used the factor tables.

Are you aware that factor tables is an inefficient search method and has the unfortunate side effect of queueing ALL of these numbers to be fully factored?

Stargate38 · 2012-01-14, 02:08

2*911²¹⁷¹+1 is prime (N-1).

Proth is faster. I just plug the prime numbers I find into the db when I find them.

schickel · 2012-01-20, 09:42

3^8890-2 needed the p1402 from 3^8890-1 proven to complete an N+1 proof.

wblipp · 2012-01-27, 17:13

Although I don't know why there is interest in (3^3333+4), I enjoy finding cases like (3^3333+4)/31 in the PRP lists, where I can visually spot that N-1 has a difference of powers of 3 (3^3333-3^3) that leaves the cyclotomic number (3^3330-1). In many cases, including this one, helping the factordb find the algebraic factors of the cyclotomic number completes the primality proof.

henryzz · 2012-01-27, 19:57

Might be worth adding all the algebraic factorizations for cyclotomic numbers.

wblipp · 2012-01-27, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

Might be worth adding all the algebraic factorizations for cyclotomic numbers.

It's more complicated than that. The factordb already finds most of the algebraic factors for pure cyclotomic numbers. But it isn't capable of finding hidden cyclotomic numbers. This case was factoring (3^3333+4)/31-1. It would require a clever factoring process to automatically see this is (3^3330-1)*27/31, and therefore all the factors of 3^3330-1 except for 31 divide the number.

2012-01-11, 05:24	#48
Batalov "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2506₁₆ Posts	(10^3258-73)/9 via a p1057 and some algebra in N+1 ...and (10^12891+11)/3 with N-1 (these are some old toys) Last fiddled with by Batalov on 2012-01-11 at 05:38

2012-01-13, 00:44	#49
Stargate38 "Daniel Jackson" May 2011 14285714285714285714 663₁₀ Posts	2911³⁸¹+1 via N-1. It's the only prime of the form 2911ⁿ+1 that I've found, other than 1823. I used the factor tables. Here's the link to the table (Near Cunningham): http://www.factordb.com/index.php?qu...at=1&sent=Show Last fiddled with by Stargate38 on 2012-01-13 at 00:54 Reason: Put link to number.

2012-01-14, 02:08	#51
Stargate38 "Daniel Jackson" May 2011 14285714285714285714 3·13·17 Posts	2911²¹⁷¹+1 is prime (N-1). Proth is faster. I just plug the prime numbers I find into the db when I find them. Last fiddled with by Stargate38 on 2012-01-14 at 02:09 Reason: forgot period at end of sentence.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Can two Mersenne numbers share a factor?	James Heinrich	Math	57	2011-09-12 14:16
Avoidance of self- & other-deception in proofs	cheesehead	Soap Box	71	2010-01-14 09:04
Curious and want to share about Prime number 23	spkarra	PrimeNet	4	2009-11-20 03:54
Status of GIMPS proofs	Brian-E	Information & Answers	7	2007-08-02 23:15
Collection of Proofs?	Orgasmic Troll	Math	1	2004-12-30 15:10

2012-01-01, 20:13	#45
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2×7×13² Posts	A fun start for the new year: searching among somewhat larger PRPs, I spotted the Wagstaff Prime (2^5807+1)/3. Wagstaff primes are especially attractive for these proofs because N+1 and N-1 are Cunningham numbers with different exponents, increasing the likelihood that one of them has lots of algebraic factors. Like most of the proofs I feature in this thread, this one was missing algebraic factors from one side. This hints that a systematic check of Wagstaff Primes may turn up more easily completed proofs in the factordb. The exponents for Wagstaff Primes are OEIS Sequence 978

2012-01-03, 15:36	#46
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2·7·13² Posts	I found another of these (2^n +/- a)/b PRPs where a+b or a-b is a power of 2, leading to sufficient algebraic factors for an N+1 or N-1 proof. Today's example was from near the clearing edge of PRPs: (2^4601+7)/39

2012-01-11, 04:15	#47
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2·7·13² Posts	I guess I've not inspired others to browse the PRP list for easy targets. I found this one among the 50 smallest PRPs. (10^1410*74-11)/63 - the N-1 cancels the 74, leaving lots of algebraic factors for 10^1410-1.

2012-01-20, 09:42	#52
schickel "Frank <^>" Dec 2004 CDP Janesville 100001001010₂ Posts	3^8890-2 needed the p1402 from 3^8890-1 proven to complete an N+1 proof.

2012-01-27, 17:13	#53
wblipp "William" May 2003 New Haven 2·7·13² Posts	Although I don't know why there is interest in (3^3333+4), I enjoy finding cases like (3^3333+4)/31 in the PRP lists, where I can visually spot that N-1 has a difference of powers of 3 (3^3333-3^3) that leaves the cyclotomic number (3^3330-1). In many cases, including this one, helping the factordb find the algebraic factors of the cyclotomic number completes the primality proof.

2012-01-27, 19:57	#54
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 2³×3×5×7² Posts	Might be worth adding all the algebraic factorizations for cyclotomic numbers.