Oops - New Prime! (M49 related)

[legendarymudkip]

Gah, now I need to relearn the binary expansion of the largest known prime number...

[ATH]

I saw this quick article when someone linked the new M49 post on phys.org:
http://phys.org/news/2010-05-sum-dig...me-evenly.html

So we are currently at 21 even and 28 odd digit sums for the 49 Mersenne Primes.Amazingly M2203 and M2281 have the same digit sum: 3106!

The digit sum of M74207281 is 100,537,543, so at least something broke 100M
The most frequent digit is 5 at 2236279 (10.0108%) and the least frequent digit is 3 at 2232135 (9,9923%).

		digitsum
M1:  p=2	3   prime
M2:  p=3	7   prime
M3:  p=5	4
M4:  p=7	10
M5:  p=13	19   prime
M6:  p=17	13   prime
M7:  p=19	28
M8:  p=31	46
M9:  p=61	73   prime
M10: p=89	112
M11: p=107	139   prime
M12: p=127	154
M13: p=521	697
M14: p=607	847
M15: p=1279	1675
M16: p=2203	3106
M17: p=2281	3106
M18: p=3217	4258
M19: p=4253	5755
M20: p=4423	5950
M21: p=9689	13216
M22: p=9941	13693   prime
M23: p=11213	14980
M24: p=19937	27202
M25: p=21701	28939
M26: p=23209	31339
M27: p=44497	60337   prime
M28: p=86243	116455
M29: p=110503	149365
M30: p=132049	179488
M31: p=216091	291745
M32: p=756839	1026544
M33: p=859433	1163443
M34: p=1257787	1704376
M35: p=1398269	1893388
M36: p=2976221	4038358
M37: p=3021377	4092673
M38: p=6972593	9440671
M39: p=13466917	18243946
M40: p=20996011 28445131
M41: p=24036583	32580433
M42: p=25964951	35170384
M43: p=30402457 41201947
M44: p=32582657 44142151
M45: p=37156667	50349694
M46: p=42643801 57766339
M47: p=43112609	58416637
M48: p=57885161	78434761
M49: p=74207281	100537543

21 even   28 odd

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

...
We'll know more about the attrition rate of these new assignments over the next few weeks/months.

For now I'm going to create a couple fun graphs.

Right now I've added a graph showing new user counts per hour for the past 7 days... the same basic setup as the TFLOP/s graph.

Check it out here (I may be tweaking this page here and there, so I apologize in advance if I break it temporarily):
http://www.mersenne.org/primenet/default.mock.php

Depending on if they're useful or not I may roll these into the actual page (not just the "mock" or beta version of the page).

[Mark Rose]

It would be nice if the TFLOP/s graph had the bottom fixed at 0 and not floating.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

It would be nice if the TFLOP/s graph had the bottom fixed at 0 and not floating.

That's come up before, but it really doesn't add much and tends to lose detail based on the size of the graph itself. It would just be a bunch of dead space.

It's curious that for the new graph I added, it actually has a base of -100 right now. Odd. I'll have to dig into the Google graphing API and see if you can even adjust the base or if it's just auto-assigned based on your data.

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

That's come up before, but it really doesn't add much and tends to lose detail based on the size of the graph itself. It would just be a bunch of dead space.

Right now it's kind of useless, since you can't tell the relative change. Like if it moves 10 pixels, how much is that? You can't tell without checking where the x-axis decided to be today.

I guess it's a pet-peeve of mine. I have several dozen graphs in view from my desk, and they all have their bottom range at 0, so I can see where things are :)

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by lavalamp

I must admit that when I first learned of the GIMPS project, I did wonder why such an ... unfortunate accronym was used. Somewhat like the chosen name for the 7th planet in our solar system.

Re. the 7th planet, nothing unfortunate about it in the original Greek, nor in the preferred English pronunciation, YOUR-uh-nuss. It's only when one slips into Hicksville (e.g. 'them thar evil eye-raynians say their nucular program is in support of a future nucular-powered space probe to Your anus') that things sound risible.

[Xyzzy]

.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

Right now it's kind of useless, since you can't tell the relative change. Like if it moves 10 pixels, how much is that? You can't tell without checking where the x-axis decided to be today.

I guess it's a pet-peeve of mine. I have several dozen graphs in view from my desk, and they all have their bottom range at 0, so I can see where things are :)

Well... whatever.

I set the mockup version to have a baseline of zero for now... it just compresses the vertical data even more. I'm still not convinced it's any better. It's only use is for a quick eyeball to see changes over the previous week and I'm not sure a baseline of zero contributes to that at all.

Other opinions out there?

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

that things sound risible.

Channeling my inner D: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc&t=03m06s

[bgbeuning]

Originally Posted by M29

I recall George saying "OK, as long as you don't call it Woltman's Internet Mersenne Prime Search".

So GIMPS really stands for "George's Internet Mersenne Prime Search"?

So George is user id 4 on the forum. There is one before him.

http://www.mersenneforum.org/member.php?u=3