Octoproths

[Dougy]

Fantastic find! They're all primes too. Three new largest octoproths.

[Dougy]

Yay!

1689898522725 72
1704984216915 72
1729280652225 72
1993468873725 72

The new most wanted is now n=74 (425575968195/18889465931478580854784 searched)

Oh and I (finally) completed n=42.

[Dougy]

Because there were too many octo's with small bases I've zipped up the complete list of octo's for bases n<=42.

I've been sick lately, and have not made much progress with octo code, but I know now, exactly how it will be integrated.

Great work 15k'ers!
TTn

[smh]

Originally Posted by Dougy

Fantastic find! They're all primes too. Three new largest octoproths.

I knew i forgot something. I didn't test them for primality. Thanks for doing so.

[Dougy]

I've been trying to find the smallest octos for each base. Lots of success... however n=87 is a stubborn base. Sieved upto 4*10^12, and no success.

Bedtime now.

[smh]

Originally Posted by Dougy

I've been trying to find the smallest octos for each base. Lots of success... however n=87 is a stubborn base. Sieved upto 4*10^12, and no success.

Bedtime now.

Okay, i have a few hours sieving time available, i'll search a bit further on this K.

FYI, i searched n=142 to 3.09x10^13

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by smh

Okay, i have a few hours sieving time available, i'll search a bit further on this K.

FYI, i searched n=142 to 3.09x10^13

May I ask:

With so many other established computational projects already available,
why do this one?

I accuse noone. However, I suspect that the answer is:

"Because this project is new, it is relatively easy to get results".


Let me quote John Kennedy:

"We choose to go to the moon and do the other thing... Not because they
are easy, but because they are hard."

There is little reward in using other people's software to do easy computations. Rewards come from succeeding at something that is hard.
The satisfaction one derives from solving a problem is commensurate with the
level of effort.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

There is little reward in using other people's software to do easy computations. Rewards come from succeeding at something that is hard.
The satisfaction one derives from solving a problem is commensurate with the
level of effort.

Agreed, but an important question is "hard for whom?" There is little reward in failing to make progress because one doesn't have the resources available to complete the task.

Sometimes relatively easy tasks are best attempted by people with relatively lowly resources. They free up the people with massive resources from having to clear them up for completeness sake. That is why I am factoring 6,768L.c130 personally rather than using the grossly disproportionate resources of NFSNET.

I leave open completely the question of whether everyone has the same value function.


Paul

[axn]

I am doing n=45 now.

[ET_]

Originally Posted by xilman

Agreed, but an important question is "hard for whom?" There is little reward in failing to make progress because one doesn't have the resources available to complete the task.

Sometimes relatively easy tasks are best attempted by people with relatively lowly resources. They free up the people with massive resources from having to clear them up for completeness sake. That is why I am factoring 6,768L.c130 personally rather than using the grossly disproportionate resources of NFSNET.

I leave open completely the question of whether everyone has the same value function.


Paul

And please don't forget that those results come from axn1 software. I'm sure he studied hard to get the most from it, and this project is a reward to his effort. The results may (maybe) be easily achieved from other searches or software, but there is little advancement in personal knowledge from using others' programs; instead he, I guess, learnt a lot to code it and gave other people the hint to search and deepen the subject by themselves; perhaps he also gave others the will to try and learn by themselves subjects otherwise not chosen.

Luigi