20220519, 17:39  #111 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
2^{4}·53 Posts 

20220609, 17:27  #112 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
2^{4}×53 Posts 
Taking 0 < x < 2000000.

20220628, 13:03  #113 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
2^{4}·53 Posts 
Taking the last remaining range 2e6 <= x <= 3e6.

20220714, 20:30  #114 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
848_{10} Posts 
Congrats, it's a world record!
Michiel's gap is now verified. PFGW output files from my range are attached.
Early in the verification process I also did a sieving check up to 2e11, where the remaining candidates matched with those given in post # 103 (with about 6.2% excess of course, again matching the expected number compared to a sieve depth of 1e12). So now the Wikipedia page can be updated. 
20220715, 09:12  #115  
Jan 2018
6E_{16} Posts 
Quote:
Will change the wiki page soon Kind regards Michiel 

20220715, 19:27  #116 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
2^{4}×53 Posts 
Glad to hear that you're still alive.
It's been getting hauntingly quiet in the prime gap search area lately. Should you, or anyone for that matter, be in the mood for hunting down a 10M gap (a "decamegagap":), I'd suggest a cool number like 89*770881#/8907708810±x, or 1223*747529#/122307475290±x or something like that. Meanwhile, I'm picking up some work in the 49877# area. The Cloudygo server looks kinda bored. 
20220717, 16:27  #117 
May 2018
2^{3}·5·7 Posts 
That is great! Prime gaps are very fun.

20220717, 17:36  #118 
Jun 2015
Vallejo, CA/.
2175_{8} Posts 
Excuse my ignorance but are we any closer to proving maximal gaps #81 and/or #82 as first occurrences? I believe we are not talking about these, but of just maximal (first known) gaps. Some places online say yes but there is no clear indication as to when was the search made exhaustive.

20220717, 18:04  #119 
Dec 2008
you know...around...
2^{4}·53 Posts 
It doesn''t look like we're getting any closer at the moment. The discussion in this thread petered out in November, I also don't know what Craig is doing currently.
There is still a minuscule possibility (its probability was even discussed in the thread) that a maximal gap has been overlooked. So strictly speaking, the search in the interval that Craig was working on, [2^{64}, 2^{64}+2^{60}], was not exhaustive. 
20220718, 03:22  #120  
Jun 2015
Vallejo, CA/.
3×383 Posts 
Quote:
On top of that (and this is only an educated guess) both gaps will be eventually be found to be first occurrences and gap #82 will probably have the highest merit of all gaps verified as first occurrences. (at that time) 

20220727, 08:15  #121  
Jan 2018
2×5×11 Posts 
Quote:
just edited the wiki prime gap page. Thanks again for verifying and good luck hunting big gaps! Ps why the fascination with the very large dividers? For me they seem too much of a (very rare) hit or (usual) miss, and after sieving and PRPing these huge numbers, it is rather annoying not having anything to show for ;) Kind regards Michiel 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Prime counting function records  D. B. Staple  Computer Science & Computational Number Theory  50  20201216 07:24 
records for primes  3.14159  Information & Answers  8  20181209 00:08 
Records for complete factorisation  BrianE  Math  25  20091216 21:40 
gmpecm records page question  yqiang  GMPECM  6  20070518 12:23 
Records in January  wblipp  ElevenSmooth  10  20040322 01:26 