mersenneforum.org Aliquot sequences that start on the integer powers n^i
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-08-20, 16:36 #463 RichD     Sep 2008 Kansas 70658 Posts Oh no! I've got i and n reversed in my above posts. I'll try to keep them straight going forward. Table n=19 has been initialized to i=96 but there is still work to do. Many small remaining composites which I compete with the elves. Don't want to duplicate work. I'll let you know when I get it to a somewhat stable state. BTW, all the i=odd sequences terminate or mostly will terminate. But you already knew that. In the meantime I can start building Table n=23 next. Well, I mean initialize in FDB...
2020-08-20, 18:05   #464
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

2×463 Posts

OK, thanks to all for your big, big help !!!
I'm going to do a big update tomorrow to get a clearer view.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yoyo Currently running up to 3^250 and 5^250
Are you sure of your exponent "250", because 5^250 has 175 digits ?

2020-08-20, 18:30   #465
warachwe

Aug 2020

19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by EdH Done. @warachwe: May I edit garambois' quote in your post 450 to match the current version in post #447?
Sure

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois Your explanations, as well as those of post #452 show that the conjectures noted with two stars are certainly not true, because if we continue the calculations long enough, sooner or later, for a rather large k, for example in the case of 3^(78*k), we will find the factor 157^2 in s(s(n)).
Those conjectures may still be true, because we can still get a factor of 79 from other primes than 157.
For example, from conjecture 2), normally 5 is what provide a factor of 3 for s(n). But when k=5 (3^20) and we get a factor 5^2, we also get factor of 11 and 41, both of which also provide a factor of 3 for s(n).
In this case I think conjecture 2) is true, but I can't prove it.

P.S. Using LTE we find that 157^2 will divide s(3^(78*k)) if and only if 157 divide k (though we maybe have more than 157^2).

2020-08-20, 18:56   #466
warachwe

Aug 2020

19 Posts

From post #364
Quote:
 Originally Posted by EdH Does this apparent observation fit in with a similar theorem? For all ai (a, i positive integers ≥ 1) s(ai) is a factor of s(a(i*n)) (for all positive n)
for p prime, s(pi) = (pi-1)/(p-1) and s(p(i*n)) = (p(i*n)-1)/(p-1).

Since (pi-1) is a factor of (p(i*n)-1), s(pi) is a factor of s(p(i*n)) for all positive integer n.

for odd a in general, this is not true. For example
Code:
s(15(3)) = 3 · 5 · 191
s(15(3*2)) = 2 · 7 · 751 · 947
s(15(3*3)) = 3 · 76091 · 147353

 2020-08-20, 18:57 #467 RichD     Sep 2008 Kansas E3516 Posts Table n=23 has been initialized to i=88. Tables 19 & 23 can be instead in the web page with the understanding there is going to be many moving targets. FDB workers will factor small composites and I will slowly tackle the larger ones (up to C120). In summary: Table n=18 - all i <=77 terminate. Eventually all cells will most likely be green. Table n=19 - It appears all i=odd sequences has or will terminate. Table n=23 - It appears all i=odd sequences has or will terminate. Last fiddled with by RichD on 2020-08-20 at 18:58 Reason: can't spell "initialized"
2020-08-20, 19:17   #468
yoyo

Oct 2006
Berlin, Germany

72·13 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois Are you sure of your exponent "250", because 5^250 has 175 digits ?
Yes, my system skipped it fast, because the composite is larger than C139.

I now go up to 3^335.
Nothing in base 6 was reserved. So I took all ub to 6^206.

Last fiddled with by yoyo on 2020-08-20 at 19:43

 2020-08-21, 05:44 #469 yoyo     Oct 2006 Berlin, Germany 11758 Posts I take also up to 7^189.
 2020-08-21, 13:31 #470 garambois     "Garambois Jean-Luc" Oct 2011 France 2·463 Posts OK, page updated. Thank you all very much for your work ! Thank you for pointing out possible handling errors. Base 18 added. Base 19 added. Base 23 added. Bases 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17 have been extended. @RichD : Can you please confirm that the attributions are good for green cells ? All cells in base 18 are green, because if n=18^i, s(n) becomes odd for all i. Indeed, n here is always even and we know that there is a change of parity if n is a perfect square or twice a perfect square. If i is even, then n is a perfect square, this is obvious. If i is odd, we pose i=2*k+1 and thus 18^(2*k+1)=(2*3^2)^(2*k+1)=2^(2*k+1)*3^(2*(2*k+1))=2*2^(2*k)*3^(2*(2*k+1)) which is thus a double of a perfect square. Thus, for the bases 18=2*3^2, 50=2*5^2, 72=2*6^6, 96=2*7^2... all squares will be green ! Last fiddled with by garambois on 2020-08-21 at 13:55 Reason: To give more information about the changes to the page...
2020-08-21, 13:47   #471
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

92610 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by warachwe Those conjectures may still be true, because we can still get a factor of 79 from other primes than 157. For example, from conjecture 2), normally 5 is what provide a factor of 3 for s(n). But when k=5 (3^20) and we get a factor 5^2, we also get factor of 11 and 41, both of which also provide a factor of 3 for s(n). In this case I think conjecture 2) is true, but I can't prove it. P.S. Using LTE we find that 157^2 will divide s(3^(78*k)) if and only if 157 divide k (though we maybe have more than 157^2).

I'm beginning to understand the mechanism, thanks again to you for your explanations !

Your reasoning seems to be able to establish what we can guess with our calculations.
Seeing this, I tell myself that it is no longer worth continuing to formulate such conjectures, like those of post #447.
Therefore, we can focus on other phenomena.
But, do you also think that it is no longer worthwhile to formulate conjectures like those of post #447, or do you think that this kind of conjecture can still be of interest ?

On the other hand, don't hesitate to let us know if you have an idea to test based on our data that you might have had !

2020-08-21, 13:49   #472
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

2·463 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yoyo If I need more for my hungry volunteers I would take base 6 and 7.

The yafu@home stats have been skyrocketing for the last few days !

2020-08-21, 14:00   #473
RichD

Sep 2008
Kansas

3,637 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois @RichD : Can you please confirm that the attributions are good for green cells ?
I would say if a sequence has less than 25 terms, it was handled by FDB workers. I simply hit the refresh button and watch the sequence drop. No calculations by me.

On the other hand, if a sequence starts say above C75, then I need to run the calculations to get it down to where the workers can finish it off.

That being said, for Table n=18, "A" should be added to "i=" 6-10, 12,14, 16, 18-22, 24-26, 30-31, 33, 36, 38, 40, 42-43, 49, 57.

Likewise for n=19 and n=23.

 Thread Tools

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post fivemack FactorDB 46 2021-02-21 10:46 schickel FactorDB 18 2013-06-12 16:09 garambois Aliquot Sequences 34 2012-06-10 21:53 Andi47 FactorDB 21 2011-12-29 21:11 schickel mersennewiki 0 2008-12-30 07:07

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:09.

Tue Aug 9 04:09:41 UTC 2022 up 32 days, 22:57, 1 user, load averages: 1.85, 1.57, 1.27

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔