20031219, 09:34  #12 
Dec 2003
India
15_{8} Posts 
testing
2^{33693433}1
:) 
20031219, 09:35  #13 
Dec 2003
India
15_{8} Posts 
Thank you
Thank you wblipp for teaching how to post exponents :)

20060117, 14:11  #14 
2^{4}×7×59 Posts 
thinking about prime's
Hello,
(2^2)1=3 2^((2^2)1)1=(2^3)1=7 2^(2^((2^2)1)1)1=(2^7)1=127 (2^127)1=.... is also a prime then (2^ ((2^127)1))1= also prime? and if so, that's mutch bigger then all the prime's that have been found. provebale? with binary numbers? 
20060117, 14:50  #15 
Jul 2004
Potsdam, Germany
3×277 Posts 
Unfortunately, it is currently (and probably the next centuries) not possible to prove primality of MM127  and attempts to find a factor (and thus prove it composite) yielded no success so far.
Interesting links I've found: http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=2850 http://homepages.donobi.net/poke/archive5/0066.html (plus replies) But there are a lot of people here with more knowledge of this issue, so please don't completely rely solely on me... 
20060118, 00:07  #16 
∂^{2}ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
3·7·13·43 Posts 
Besides the monstrous runtime estimates given in the above threads for LL testing a number the size of M(M127), there is an even more fundamental problem: how to store numbers that large. M(M127) is a number having 2^{127} or roughly 10^{40} bits. Assume we had some magical way of using just a single hydrogen atom to store each bit of such a number (note that Helium would be safer if there's any oxygen nearby). Thus we would need roughly (10^{14} times Avogadro's number) hydrogen atoms, or roughly 10^{14} grams of hydrogen to store our data, assuming a dataperfect algorithm that needed only as many bits as the number being tested. That is roughly 1000 cubic kilometers of hydrogen at standard temperature and pressure  roughly equivalent to the volume of atmosphere overlying a small country  or around 1 cubic kilometer in morecompact supercooledliquid form. Moreover, we'd need a way to coherently and quickly manipulate all the atoms in that volume in parallel. And even if we could do this amazing feat, the large size of this data reservoir would set fundamental limits on how quickly we could compute using it  how long does it take light to cross a spherical reservoir containing 1 cubic kilometer of ultracold liquid hydrogen? The answer is, on the order of a microsecond (thanks, alpertron ;), which limits our maximum operating frequency to around 1MHz, which is in fact much slower than today's microchips!
Thus, in order to complete the computation in less than the life of the universe (based on the time it takes lowmass stars to burn out), our hypothetical computer would have to be many orders of magnitude smaller than it could possibly be simply to store the data. It appears one is trapped between Scylla and Charybdis (the "rock and whirlpoolslashhardplace" of Greek mythology)  the only way to be fast enough is to be much too small. Call me a pessimist, but I think I'll stick to trialfactoring  there, storing the data (which need only be the size of the factor candidates being tried) is no problem, and neither is massive parallelism (many machines can work on the problem, each on its own range without interacting with the others, except to get new ranges to test.) (I've gone up to around 176 bits using my own factoring code  no factors yet.) Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 20060118 at 01:23 Reason: Since this topic is closely related to the more general issue of whether 2[sup]{Some Mersenne prime}[/sup]1 is prime, I've merged it into that thread. 
20060118, 21:52  #17 
Jun 2003
The Computer
620_{8} Posts 
Does anyone know the speed difference between factoring MM127 with MFAC and using Factor_4 on M(170141183460469231731687303715884105727)? (the long version of MM127)

20060120, 00:20  #18 
Sep 2002
825_{10} Posts 
Ok, I don't know if this will require some kind of high level math knowledge to understand the answer, but I have a question. Why and how is it possible to find a factor of a number when you can't calculate the exact number itself without filling the universe or creating an impossible circumstance?

20060120, 03:23  #19  
"William"
May 2003
New Haven
2^{2}·593 Posts 
Quote:


20060120, 11:34  #20 
Aug 2002
Buenos Aires, Argentina
1455_{10} Posts 
As an interesting application of modular arithmetic you can see on my site the factorization of number near googolplex and factorization of number near googolplexplex, where googolplex = 10^(10^100) and googolplexplex = 10^googolplex.
Of course you can't expect to completely factor these numbers, but at least some factors can be found and show that most of these numbers are composite. 
20060120, 21:03  #21 
Jan 2005
Transdniestr
503 Posts 
Question about the Googol program
Hi Dario,
I'm interested in your Googol program but I'm a bit confused. At the top, it says for the numbers involved (the range of googolplex +/ 1000) that: They have no other prime factors less than 330 x 10^12 but the program at the bottom says: This version supports numbers up to 2 x 10^14. So that implies to me that the code would have to be modified to find any new factors. ======================================================= Also, is there a similar program on your site to find factors of numbers near googolplexplex? Thanks, Grandpa Last fiddled with by grandpascorpion on 20060120 at 21:03 
20060121, 19:09  #22  
∂^{2}ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
3×7×13×43 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
(M48) NEW MERSENNE PRIME! LARGEST PRIME NUMBER DISCOVERED!  dabaichi  News  571  20201026 11:02 
Oh noes! The "42nd Mersenne prime" isn't prime!  ixfd64  Lounge  7  20050403 19:27 
The next Mersenne prime...  tha  Hardware  1  20050125 15:54 
The 40th known Mersenne prime, 2209960111 is not PRIME!  illmanq  Miscellaneous Math  33  20040919 05:02 
The next Mersenne prime  flava  Lounge  15  20040519 08:49 