I take a known prime and prove it to be a composite (..or maybe need help?)

[TheMawn]

Originally Posted by TheMawn

And that pretty much seals it. Bot.

I should clarify for anyone who might be wondering about this, go back a few pages and find LaurV's explanation which is fairly good. In this case, the bot is parsing the various replies for specific words (in this case "new Fermat Factors") and constructed something that your average monkey might mistake for a valuable response.

The bot is lame so it fails to understand any meaning whatsoever from the sentence. It picked up "new Fermat Factors" from a sentence whose meaning was almost unaffected by those three words.

Because Batalov's reply was otherwise completely unrelated to the specific topic, there was nothing else within the bot's scope, so it built an entire reply off those three words, and the result is some unrelated gibberish. On top of that, failing to use our own built-in quote function (and earlier suggesting that we swap the "Submit Reply" and "Preview Post" buttons because it would be more convenient for it if they were reversed) shows that we are dealing with something that can't think.

(I guess we can't rule out a particularly stupid human being, then)

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by LaurV

To be back on track: just pointing out that, according with factorDB, this number is known to be composite since (about) March 2011. As Batalov said, the guy is either innocent (in the bad sense) or a bot.

For my part, I'd be impressed if it was a bot. It would be relatively easy for a bot to check for small or known factors, which storflyt32 tends not to do. It's hard for a bot to invent quixotic definitions for standard terms, and then explain what they mean in context. I think that storflyt32 is a human, and probably not a native English speaker.

Originally Posted by LaurV

[edit: I am also interested in the discussion started by CRG's question, for some "general" case]

I was sort of hoping that Silverman would have put his 2 cents in. It's entirely possible that there is no special form, but I'd be more inclined to believe it if he said so.

[storflyt32]

Getting this result tonight.

If you try dividing this number:

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731307790

The C1057 at the end there:

BTW: Not the C1133 which is the composite remainder of 2^4096, but a similar, slightly smaller number.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731307941


with this number (which is a C225)

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731295787

you will be able to get this PRP829 as a result.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731295787

BTW, the query lines becomes a little long, so I am using the shorter syntaxes available for this instead.

The problem here is that this C225 is really a hard one to factorize. It probably has only some 2 factors rather than 3 or 4.

[storflyt32]

Thanks!

So, if you don't mind, a question for you.

In which way are you supposed to find the "next" prime in a (logical) sequence.

Take this link as an example.

http://factordb.com/index.php?query=2%5E1024%2B1

Assume that I only happened to know about the three smallest factors, but not the largest one,being present here.

In which way am I able to possibly be able to find or locate this "next" prime?

Not all sequences are that logical. There may be a mix of even factors when it comes to size. In other cases there may only
be one or more small ones and perhaps a large one. Nothing in between.

Still such a number may become fully factored at times.

Thanks for any answers!

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

For my part, I'd be impressed if it was a bot. It would be relatively easy for a bot to check for small or known factors, which storflyt32 tends not to do. It's hard for a bot to invent quixotic definitions for standard terms, and then explain what they mean in context. I think that storflyt32 is a human, and probably not a native English speaker.

A bot performing like that would impress me too, but what clinches my own perceived lack of forum-integrity in storflyt32's postings is the failure to respond to what other people are saying or to interact with others at all. The English is good enough to be able to do that. If human, the motivation for the behaviour is unclear (it may be attention seeking as has been suggested, or it may be that this person just doesn't interact with others in normal life for whatever reason). But whatever the reasons behind it, the behaviour is unsuitable for an interactive forum.

[kladner]

I am amazed that this thread has stretched out for so many pages.

[storflyt32]

This could possibly be added under "More information" for

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000720533470

is a factor of

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000716659482

Please see

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000716666264

for this.

- - -

Also this:

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731322732

apparently is having factor

http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000731320815

This factor is only a couple of hours old, by the way.

Result listed at:

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000731295787

Thanks!

[retina]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

A bot performing like that would impress me too, ...

And I doubt that bots would edit their own posts three minutes later.

[LaurV]

About 10 years ago I was playing some board games on a gaming site. There was a girl there who almost could sustain any conversation, play reasonable 3 or 4 different games (like gomoku, reversi, etc), participate in ad-hoc competitions, post on the forums (and edit her own posts too!). She was quite popular on the site and everybody knew her. We also learned she was a bot. The only reason we learned she was a bot, was because the author said so. Suspicion arose from the fact that she was doing the same mistakes in the games for ever and ever (her play was not randomized, she was there to talk, not to play!), and some people used her to increase their ratings on the site (playing and winning against her the same game, few times a day or so in a row). She also used to talk in 50 chat rooms (game boards) in the same time, or play 10 games simultaneously, which was really strange! And suspicious! The author of the girl sold the site for good money (and now you can only play poker and rummy and stupid games on it!) and then worked for google for a while (and "she" was one of the reasons why google took him, beside of other many nice things he did), till he found a better life for himself. We used to be friends once...

[edit: this is not to say that you are far behind of what the bots can do today, sorry if you feel so, but just imagine this was 10 years ago! ]

[storflyt32]

Is factorization meant to be just a tool, or are you ever supposed to be able to think yourself and possibly be able to
make up your mind?

Have a look at this number and its corresponding factorization.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000647335885


This number, having the remaining composite part

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000647336006


in fact divides this number

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000017377290


giving me this composite number as the result.

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000643754575


So to me, this number has really become fully factorized.


The remaining factor in between when it comes to these Fermat numbers is

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000017315243


Really, for now the largest Fermat factors typically are not part of a given factorization.

At least it does not show up there right now in the Factor Database.


These numbers eventually becomes part of even larger number structures.

For example

http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1000000000012172552

Trying out this one right now.


Therefore, several other similar examples should exist among these composite numbers.

For now the only option is to try dividing a given composite number with one of these numbers and then multiply the answer you get the opposite way in order to see whether it matches the number you started dividing from.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by storflyt32

For now the only option is to try dividing a given composite number with one of these numbers and then multiply the answer you get the opposite way in order to see whether it matches the number you started dividing from.

I concur doctor it is a bot.
That and the evident lack of self-defense.

Let's test this hypothesis:

Originally Posted by Wiki

The following is from the noted source.

Not all numbers of a given length are equally hard to factor. The hardest instances of these problems (for currently known techniques) are semiprimes, the product of two prime numbers. When they are both large, for instance more than two thousand bits long, randomly chosen, and about the same size (but not too close, e.g. to avoid efficient factorization by Fermat's factorization method), even the fastest prime factorization algorithms on the fastest computers can take enough time to make the search impractical; that is, as the number of digits of the primes being factored increases, the number of operations required to perform the factorization on any computer increases drastically.