|
2009-12-29, 18:36
|
#177 |
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22·23·31 Posts |
Sierp Base 3
Sierp Base 3 Range = 300M-310M
Conjectured k = 125,050,976,086 Covering Set = 5, 7, 13, 17, 19, 37, 41, 193, 757 Trivial Factors k == 1 mod 2(2) Found Primes: 3,589,061k's - File emailed Remaining k's: 507k's - Tested to n=2.5K - File emailed MOB Eliminations: 41,193,757k's - File emailed Files emailed Range released |
|
|
|
2009-12-30, 07:49
|
#178 | |
May 2007
Kansas; USA
22×5×11×47 Posts |
Quote:
Wow, 41M+ MOB eliminations for a k=10M range. That's amazing.  Your file shows 1,410,432 MOB eliminations.I won't be able to show these on the pages since it's a large-conjectured base with the k-range only searched to n=2500. If anyone would like to search Sierp base 3 k=300M-310M for n=2.5K to 25K (or to 10K), then I could show it on the pages. Attached are the 507 k's remaining at n=2500. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-12-30 at 07:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-30, 17:19
|
#179 | |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
22·241 Posts |
Quote:
KEP |
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-31, 14:11
|
#180 |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
22·241 Posts |
The range: k>300M >k k<=310M is complete to n=25K. 464 primes were found and verified and double, heck even triple checked. There is a total of 43 k's remaining all listed in the attached file.
Regards KEP |
|
|
|
|
2010-04-14, 04:05
|
#181 |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22×23×31 Posts |
Sierp Base 3
Sierp Base 3 Range = 310M-330M
Conjectured k = 125,050,976,086 Covering Set = 5, 7, 13, 17, 19, 37, 41, 193, 757 Trivial Factors k == 1 mod 2(2) Found Primes: 7,176,408k's - File emailed Remaining k's: 91k's - Tested to n=25K - File emailed MOB Eliminations: 2,823,501k's - File emailed compPRP: 25k's - File emailed Range released |
|
|
|
|
2010-05-09, 20:53
|
#182 |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22·23·31 Posts |
Sierp Base 3 - Range 330M-340M
Conjectured k = 125,050,976,086 Covering Set = 5, 7, 13, 17, 19, 37, 41, 193, 757 Trivial Factors k == 1 mod 2(2) Found Primes: 3587632k's - File emailed Remaining: 60k's - File emailed - Tested to n=25K MOB Eliminations: 1412308k's - File emailed Range Released compPRP 333202810*3^4+1 333388184*3^67+1 333401180*3^5+1 334374110*3^4+1 335181778*3^6+1 335276768*3^4+1 335550520*3^55+1 335556080*3^4+1 336267398*3^79+1 336787876*3^3+1 338344760*3^5+1 338945294*3^5+1 338985326*3^71+1 |
|
|
|
|
2010-05-09, 21:10
|
#183 | |
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
11×571 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-09, 22:19
|
#184 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22×23×31 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-10, 05:29
|
#185 | |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
22×5×11×47 Posts |
Quote:
The GWNUM libraries still seem to have a bug. I'm not going to test them here but I'll make a prediction: All of the compPRP's with an exponent < 50 are actually composite but the compPRP's with an exponent >= 50 are actually prime. So the n<50 compPRPs are correct as shown. Of course this doesn't make a difference for the proof of the conjecture since it appears that you found higher primes for all of the k's. I have found tons of compPRP's on Sierp base 63 with an exponent >= 100 that turned out to actually be prime. As a matter of fact, just like for base 3 with an exponent >=50, ALL compPRP's on Sierp base 63 with an exponent >= 100 turned out to be prime. There were no composites. In several cases, the k shows as remaining at n=1000 and I had to go back and test the compPRP with other software just to make sure that the k could be removed. This is not a bug in the starting bases script because I've hopped through many hoops to attempt to prove PRP's correctly. The GWNUM libraries themselves need to be fixed. I have 10s and now, probably even a couple of hundred examples of them on both bases 3 and 63. BTW, as a point of reference on speed and proving PRPs: I use trial factoring of 35% (-f35) on base 3 to n=25K and 10% (-f10) on base 63 to n=1K. If you drop it much lower than that on base 3, you'll get PRPs (that are actually prime) that for some reason, PFGW cannot prove. In other words, it doesn't prove them prime nor does it prove them composite. In all cases, I found these PRPs to be prime but it's a nuisunce so it's best to put the trial factoring high enough to avoid them completely. (BTW, because of this, the starting bases script ASSUMES that unprovable PRPs that also cannot be proven composite are prime and hence, are also written to the primes file. Nevertheless, these PRPs would need to be proven by other software. These are fairly rare unless you use very low trial factoring so don't worry about it if it isn't clear.) Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2010-05-10 at 05:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-10, 06:25
|
#186 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22×23×31 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-10, 12:35
|
#187 | |
|
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
11000100010012 Posts |
Quote:
Code:
More conservative in selecting an FFT length for non-base-2 cases. |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 1090 | 2021-04-15 11:56 |
| Bases 33-100 reservations/statuses/primes | Siemelink | Conjectures 'R Us | 1682 | 2021-04-13 23:50 |
| Bases 101-250 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 895 | 2021-04-11 08:17 |
| Bases 251-500 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 2276 | 2021-04-08 18:12 |
| Bases 4-32 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 1431 | 2021-02-18 16:05 |
