20070715, 20:54  #12 
May 2005
652_{16} Posts 

20070715, 21:02  #13 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
27EB_{16} Posts 
Status on k=289; gap closed
I have now 'officially' closed the gap on k=289. I've now tested all the way from n=260K up past the next known prime at n=501991. I found that one prime that Bo had already found.
I'm actually testing all the way to n=520K to verify some prior results and LLR is currently at n=503K. Gary 
20070715, 21:14  #14  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
27EB_{16} Posts 
Unusual gaps between primes
Quote:
I'll throw out a somewhat similiar situation in my gapfilling efforts... Although it has many primes, k=289 is an excellent example of one of the more extreme gaps between primes that I've seen for a k that we would not consider lowweight. It has primes at 55693, 60243, 67891, 77391, 90201, then a 'monster' gap of no primes (now confirmed by me), followed by primes at 501991, 509401, 610737, 728205. This, I think, is far more unusual than a lowweight k having a gap between primes of more than 1M. Go figure. I think an entire thread could be dedicated to record gaps between primes for different weights of k. These unpredictible gaps are what makes primes so fun! Gary 

20070715, 21:17  #15 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
27EB_{16} Posts 
k=101 question

20070715, 21:17  #16  
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts 
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_prime 

20070715, 22:43  #17 
May 2005
2·809 Posts 
You are correct, I have tested it 500000<n<1000000 so far. Shortly I will begin testing it in the 1M<n<2M range. When I have announced prime @ n=900358, Kosmaj suggested that the next one might be @ n~9M because last 3 "n"s for this k that start with "9" were primes
Last fiddled with by Cruelty on 20070715 at 22:46 
20070716, 11:20  #18 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
100000011101_{2} Posts 
k=55 tested to 800,000. Continuing.

20070716, 16:11  #19 
"Dave"
Sep 2005
UK
101011010110_{2} Posts 
k=81
LLR at 840k. Continuing.

20070716, 16:22  #20  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
11×929 Posts 
Quote:
Well...you should test k=101 from n=9M to 10M!! That'd be funny if you found one pretty quick. Of course it would take ages to process each candidate! Gary 

20070717, 08:16  #21 
May 2005
3122_{8} Posts 

20070718, 03:00  #22 
Nov 2003
2·1,811 Posts 
k=105
Cruelty, but that's great news, that you are already working on them!
BTW, Flatlander stopped n=105 at n=541300 and kindly sent me the rest of his file sieved to 4.2T. If anybody is interested in continuing tests, just let me know. Otherwise I'll send the block to about 570k to B'maxx. If there is enough interest I can open a thread for group testing as well. Last fiddled with by Kosmaj on 20070718 at 03:01 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes  KEP  Conjectures 'R Us  1041  20200823 21:36 
Proth and Riesel Primes  lukerichards  Number Theory Discussion Group  7  20180120 16:47 
Riesel primes  Primeinator  Information & Answers  12  20090719 23:30 
Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5: Post Primes Here  robert44444uk  Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5  358  20081208 16:28 
Riesel.15k.org LLRnet Primes Found!  SlashDude  15k Search  3  20040614 16:07 