mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-01-10, 11:38   #12
Aramis Wyler
 
Aramis Wyler's Avatar
 
"Bill Staffen"
Jan 2013
Pittsburgh, PA, USA

22·89 Posts
Default

I don't understand the problem. If he's adding legitimate factors to the database, wouldn't that be a good thing? Hopefully at least some of those numbers hadn't already had one.
Aramis Wyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-10, 12:13   #13
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

121816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramis Wyler View Post
I don't understand the problem. If he's adding legitimate factors to the database, wouldn't that be a good thing? Hopefully at least some of those numbers hadn't already had one.
The factors are currently at 44.x bits. All of GIMPS surviving exponents have been factored up to at least 61 bits. Therefore all these exponents should have a known (smaller) factor already in the db. Nonetheless, it is mathematically useful to have new factors for these (already factored) exponents... I guess. Especially if these are being systematically generated.
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-11, 16:57   #14
TheMawn
 
TheMawn's Avatar
 
May 2013
East. Always East.

11×157 Posts
Default

Well I honestly don't know if what this user is doing is harming the server in any way or not. I don't know how taxing a hundred thousand factors plus time stamp, username, and whatever else comes with, etc, is on the server.

Just bringing it up in case someone else knows.
TheMawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-12, 06:43   #15
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

463210 Posts
Default

I think they've stopped at 2^45. Just when it was getting interesting...
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-16, 13:00   #16
flagrantflowers
 
Apr 2014

27 Posts
Default

He just finished 2^50 this morning. If he keeps this pace, probably impossible, he'll get to around 2^61 in 8-10 months.

560841 factors found up to this point.
flagrantflowers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-27, 23:25   #17
pdazzl
 
Apr 2014

7·17 Posts
Default

Does he only test already factored numbers?
pdazzl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-28, 01:21   #18
TheMawn
 
TheMawn's Avatar
 
May 2013
East. Always East.

11×157 Posts
Default

All these factors are, of course, new. The user is testing numbers which are already factored but he is finding new ones beyond the first known factor.

For the purposes of GIMPS, there is no value in finding a number's second factor. You might have stopped looking after 42 bits but he's gone and looked for more.
TheMawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-28, 05:12   #19
snme2pm1
 
"Graham uses ISO 8601"
Mar 2014
AU, Sydney

241 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
have been factored up to at least 61 bits. Therefore all these exponents should have a known (smaller) factor already in the db.
Is it not possible that some exponents have been knocked out of further interest due a factor discovered by Pollard P-1 means which might be relatively large?
In which case a smaller factor might be available?
snme2pm1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-28, 05:49   #20
snme2pm1
 
"Graham uses ISO 8601"
Mar 2014
AU, Sydney

241 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdazzl View Post
Does he only test already factored numbers?
No, a different operation entirely.
Consider:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
He is searching "by k" (as opposed to "by p" we do on GIMPS). There should be a thread here around where we used to post pari lines, I think he found one of those.
snme2pm1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-28, 06:00   #21
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

218716 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snme2pm1 View Post
Is it not possible that some exponents have been knocked out of further interest due a factor discovered by Pollard P-1 means which might be relatively large?
In which case a smaller factor might be available?
Yes, it is possible. In this case, the "smaller" factor will be over 2^61 (the lowest TF limit for smallest exponents). That is because all the exponents had TF to some point, before trying P-1.
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-05-28, 07:19   #22
snme2pm1
 
"Graham uses ISO 8601"
Mar 2014
AU, Sydney

24110 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
all the exponents had TF to some point, before trying P-1.
Ok, I believe you if you declare that exponents of some particular range had some well known pre-factoring.
Don't get me wrong, I want to believe you!
snme2pm1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Old User Unregistered Information & Answers 1 2012-10-18 23:31
The user CP has gone :( retina Forum Feedback 5 2006-12-05 16:47
Changing My User ID endless mike NFSNET Discussion 1 2004-10-31 19:38
OSX yet? new user here KevinLee Hardware 6 2003-12-12 17:06
help for a Mac user drakkar67 Software 3 2003-02-11 10:55

All times are UTC. The time now is 18:56.

Thu Jul 9 18:56:19 UTC 2020 up 106 days, 16:29, 1 user, load averages: 1.60, 1.83, 1.90

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.