mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-04-09, 04:01   #1
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

1,579 Posts
Default Square Riesel numbers < 3896845303873881175159314620808887046066972469809^2

Looking at https://oeis.org/A270896

Is there a similar sequence on the riesel side?
Citrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-09, 21:18   #2
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

473010 Posts
Default

Are you asking whether we have a list for which n2 -1 is prime?
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-09, 22:04   #3
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26×131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Are you asking whether we have a list for which n2 -1 is prime?
the linked sequence has this definition:

"Values of n for which n^2 is a Sierpiński number."

the equivalent on the Riesel numbers is:

"Values of n for which n^2 is a Riesel number."

in theory.

Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2017-04-09 at 22:04
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-09, 22:56   #4
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

938710 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M. Filaseta et al, 2008
Theorem 11
There are infinitely many squares that are Riesel numbers. One such Riesel number is 3896845303873881175159314620808887046066972469809^2.

The first sentence of this theorem is not new; it is a consequence of the work of Y.-G. Chen:
Y.-G. Chen, On integers of the forms kr − 2n and kr2n + 1, J. Number Theory 98 (2003), 310–319.
M. Filaseta et al., On Powers Associated with Sierpinski Numbers, Riesel Numbers and Polignac’s Conjecture, Journal of Number Theory, Volume 128, Issue 7, July 2008, Pages 1916-1940.

This is one of the papers linked in OEIS A101036
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-10, 02:05   #5
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

111728 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
the linked sequence has this definition:

"Values of n for which n^2 is a Sierpiński number."

the equivalent on the Riesel numbers is:

"Values of n for which n^2 is a Riesel number."

in theory.
I would not have needed to ask if I'd just looked up the def'n of Sierpinski and Riesel numbers; after all the CRUS work, I'd forgotten that base 2 is default. I was conflating coefficient and base, among other mistakes...
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-10, 04:29   #6
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

249216 Posts
Default

[thinking]
The part with "under the unproved assumption..." which is mentioned in the OEIS sequence linked by Serge, occurred to me when I was looking at the sequence linked by the OP (where it is not mentioned). I was thinking, "how the hack do they know those are all Sierpinski numbers?". Because if we could prove that, we won't need to do all the CRUS effort we do now, would we?
[/thinking]
LaurV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-10, 04:55   #7
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·5·11·43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
[thinking]
The part with "under the unproved assumption..." which is mentioned in the OEIS sequence linked by Serge, occurred to me when I was looking at the sequence linked by the OP (where it is not mentioned). I was thinking, "how the hack do they know those are all Sierpinski numbers?". Because if we could prove that, we won't need to do all the CRUS effort we do now, would we?
[/thinking]
It's easy to show a number is Sierpinski; just exhibit the covering set. It's rather a pain to show one is the *lowest* possible, as CRUS has demonstrated for years now.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-10, 05:36   #8
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

2·31·151 Posts
Default

Well... not.

This affirmation assumes that all S' numbers have a small covering set. If we would know that, we don't need to do anything for CRUS. This is what I was saying. But we don't know that, and that is why all the effort for CRUS. We can show a number is S' easily, by showing its covering set assuming it has one which is small enough/finite/whatever.

The "small note" was mentioned in the OEIS in the R' side sequence (linked by Serge) but not in the S' side (linked by OP).

We know some S' or R' numbers (those with a small covering set), but we don't know if those are ALL (of course, under a limit. I am not talking about infinity here).
LaurV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-10, 10:50   #9
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

838410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
Well... not.

This affirmation assumes that all S' numbers have a small covering set. If we would know that, we don't need to do anything for CRUS. This is what I was saying. But we don't know that, and that is why all the effort for CRUS. We can show a number is S' easily, by showing its covering set assuming it has one which is small enough/finite/whatever.

The "small note" was mentioned in the OEIS in the R' side sequence (linked by Serge) but not in the S' side (linked by OP).

We know some S' or R' numbers (those with a small covering set), but we don't know if those are ALL (of course, under a limit. I am not talking about infinity here).
true we don't know if these are all but we can know if any of the values divide by a small prime very fast for most inputs.

for k*2^n-1 :

k=2 mod 3 n = 1 mod 2 creates a value divisible by 3
k=1 mod 3 n = 0 mod 2 also creates divisibility by 3
k= 0 mod 3 never divisible by 3 for the final number, regardless of n.

...

Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2017-04-10 at 10:51
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are Mersenne numbers really square? JM Montolio A Miscellaneous Math 23 2018-03-08 14:24
Square-freeness of Mersenne numbers Qubit Math 2 2014-05-02 23:51
square free Mersenne Numbers? kurtulmehtap Math 0 2012-09-17 13:04
Square numbers and binary representation ET_ Miscellaneous Math 40 2010-06-06 12:55
How did they prove that Riesel/Sierpinski numbers. Unregistered Homework Help 17 2009-10-08 18:08

All times are UTC. The time now is 07:05.

Sun Apr 11 07:05:28 UTC 2021 up 3 days, 1:46, 1 user, load averages: 1.58, 1.78, 1.94

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.