mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Blogorrhea > sweety439

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-11-23, 00:26   #1112
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

276410 Posts
Default

Remain k for Riesel CK=1:


Remain k for Riesel CK=2:


Remain k for Riesel CK=3:


Remain k for Riesel CK=4:

14: (proven)
29: (proven)
44: (proven)
59: (proven)
74: (proven)
89: (proven)
104: (proven)
119: (proven)
134: (proven)
149: (proven)
164: (proven)
179: (proven)
194: (proven)
209: (proven)
224: (proven)
239: (proven)
254: (proven)
269: 1,
284: (proven)
299: (proven)
314: (proven)
329: (proven)
344: (proven)
359: (proven)
374: (proven)
389: (proven)
404: (proven)
419: (proven)
434: (proven)
449: (proven)
464: (proven)
479: (proven)
494: (proven)
509: (proven)
524: (proven)
539: (proven)
554: (proven)
569: (proven)
584: (proven)
599: (proven)
614: (proven)
629: (proven)
644: (proven)
659: 3,
674: (proven)
689: (proven)
704: (proven)
719: (proven)
734: (proven)
749: (proven)
764: (proven)
779: (proven)
794: (proven)
809: (proven)
824: (proven)
839: (proven)
854: (proven)
869: (proven)
884: (proven)
899: (proven)
914: (proven)
929: (proven)
944: (proven)
959: (proven)
974: (proven)
989: (proven)
1004: (proven)
1019: 2,

Remain k for Riesel CK=5:

11: (proven)
23: (proven)
35: (proven)
47: (proven)
71: (proven)
83: (proven)
95: (proven)
107: (proven)
131: (proven)
143: (proven)
155: (proven)
167: (proven)
191: (proven)
203: (proven)
215: (proven)
227: (proven)
251: (proven)
263: (proven)
275: 4,
287: (proven)
311: (proven)
323: (proven)
335: (proven)
347: 3,
371: (proven)
383: (proven)
395: (proven)
407: (proven)
431: (proven)
443: (proven)
455: (proven)
467: (proven)
491: (proven)
503: (proven)
515: (proven)
527: (proven)
551: (proven)
563: (proven)
575: 3,
587: 3,
611: (proven)
623: (proven)
635: (proven)
647: 4,
671: (proven)
683: (proven)
695: (proven)
707: (proven)
731: 3,
743: (proven)
755: (proven)
767: (proven)
791: (proven)
803: (proven)
815: (proven)
827: (proven)
851: (proven)
863: (proven)
875: (proven)
887: (proven)
911: (proven)
923: (proven)
935: (proven)
947: (proven)
971: (proven)
983: (proven)
995: (proven)
1007: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=6:

34: (proven)
69: (proven)
139: (proven)
174: (proven)
244: (proven)
279: (proven)
349: (proven)
384: 1,
454: (proven)
489: 5,
559: (proven)
594: (proven)
664: (proven)
699: 3,
769: (proven)
804: (proven)
874: (proven)
909: (proven)
979: (proven)
1014: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=7:


Remain k for Riesel CK=8:

20: (proven)
41: (proven)
62: (proven)
125: (proven)
146: (proven)
188: (proven)
230: (proven)
272: (proven)
293: (proven)
307: (proven)
356: (proven)
377: (proven)
398: 7,
440: (proven)
461: (proven)
482: (proven)
538: (proven)
545: (proven)
566: (proven)
608: (proven)
650: 4,
692: (proven)
713: 1, 7,
762: (proven)
776: (proven)
797: (proven)
818: (proven)
860: (proven)
881: 1,
902: (proven)
965: (proven)
986: 6,
993: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=9:

19: (proven)
39: (proven)
79: (proven)
99: (proven)
109: (proven)
159: (proven)
189: (proven)
199: (proven)
219: (proven)
229: (proven)
259: (proven)
309: (proven)
319: (proven)
339: (proven)
379: (proven)
399: (proven)
429: 5,
439: (proven)
459: (proven)
469: (proven)
499: 5,
519: (proven)
549: 6,
579: (proven)
589: (proven)
619: 6,
639: (proven)
669: (proven)
679: (proven)
709: (proven)
739: (proven)
759: 1,
789: (proven)
799: (proven)
819: (proven)
829: (proven)
859: (proven)
879: (proven)
919: (proven)
939: (proven)
949: (proven)
999: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=10:

32: (proven)
65: (proven)
98: (proven)
197: (proven)
296: (proven)
362: (proven)
428: (proven)
560: (proven)
593: (proven)
626: (proven)
725: (proven)
758: (proven)
857: (proven)
890: (proven)
956: 1,
1022: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=11:


Remain k for Riesel CK=12:

142: (proven)
285: (proven)
571: (proven)
714: (proven)
901: (proven)
1000: (proven)

Remain k for Riesel CK=13:

5: (proven)
27: (proven)
38: (proven)
53: (proven)
55: (proven)
77: (proven)
101: (proven)
111: (proven)
123: 11,
173: 11,
195: (proven)
221: 11,
223: 4,
245: (proven)
302: (proven)
317: 11,
341: (proven)
363: (proven)
365: (proven)
387: (proven)
391: (proven)
413: (proven)
437: 7,
447: (proven)
463: 7,
475: 4,
485: (proven)
531: (proven)
533: 11,
535: 4, 5,
548: 7,
557: (proven)
581: 2, 5,
605: (proven)
615: 12,
643: (proven)
653: 4,
677: (proven)
701: (proven)
727: 4, 8,
773: (proven)
783: 3,
811: (proven)
812: 4,
821: 7,
845: (proven)
867: 8,
893: 7, 9,
895: 7,
917: (proven)
941: (proven)
951: 1,
1013: (proven)
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-25, 15:18   #1113
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

53148 Posts
Default

The reason for (k=27 is excluded from S8) (k=4 is excluded from S16) (k=1 is excluded from R4) (k=1 is excluded from R8) is the same as (k=1 is excluded from CRUS R14) (k=1 is excluded from CRUS R18) (k=1 is excluded from CRUS R20) (k=1 is excluded from CRUS R24)

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2020-12-10 at 07:30
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 14:14   #1114
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

ACC16 Posts
Default

Conjecture: For any integer triple (k,b,c) (k>=1, b>=2, c != 0, gcd(k,c) = 1, gcd(b,c) = 1) such that (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1,b-1) cannot be ruled out (by full numerical covering set, or by full algebraic covering set, or by partial numerical/partial algebraic covering set) as either only containing composites or containing only finitely many primes, then there are infinitely many integers n>=1 such that (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1,b-1) is prime.
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 03:40   #1115
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22×691 Posts
Default

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...7wgHppPnpz/pub

Update the file of Riesel conjectures to include the newest test limit of R2
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 03:44   #1116
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22·691 Posts
Default

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...XZqud2f_6r/pub

Update the file of Sierpinski conjectures to include the newest test limit of S30
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 04:09   #1117
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

24·571 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
Conjecture: For any integer triple (k,b,c) (k>=1, b>=2, c != 0, gcd(k,c) = 1, gcd(b,c) = 1) such that (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1,b-1) cannot be ruled out (by full numerical covering set, or by full algebraic covering set, or by partial numerical/partial algebraic covering set) as either only containing composites or containing only finitely many primes, then there are infinitely many integers n>=1 such that (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1,b-1) is prime.
What's c? Why it matters? (you don't use it at all in the series).
Technically, you say the following: "any series which does not contain only finitely many primes will contain infinitely many primes"
Thank you Mr. Obvious. Where is the conjecture?
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 07:43   #1118
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22×691 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
What's c? Why it matters? (you don't use it at all in the series).
Technically, you say the following: "any series which does not contain only finitely many primes will contain infinitely many primes"
Thank you Mr. Obvious. Where is the conjecture?
It should be (k*b^n+c)/gcd(k+c,b-1) rather than (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1,b-1), I copied/pasted and forget to change.

This conjecture is: For any integer triple (k,b,c) (k>=1, b>=2, c != 0, gcd(k,c) = 1, gcd(b,c) = 1) such that (k*b^n+c)/gcd(k+c,b-1) cannot be ruled out (by full numerical covering set, or by full algebraic covering set, or by partial numerical/partial algebraic covering set) as either only containing composites or containing only finitely many primes, there are infinitely many integers n>=1 such that (k*b^n+c)/gcd(k+c,b-1) is prime (for the examples of (k*b^n+c)/gcd(k+c,b-1) can be ruled out as either only containing composites or containing only finitely many primes, see post #1087, also see page 12 of https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/~cbright/reports/mepn.pdf)

e.g. these families are conjectured to contain infinitely many primes with integer n>=1:

* (k*2^n-1)/gcd(k-1,2-1) for all 1<=k<509203
* (k*3^n-1)/gcd(k-1,3-1) for all 1<=k<12119
* (k*4^n-1)/gcd(k-1,4-1) for all 1<=k<361 which is not square (squares k ruled out as only containing composites (k=1 has prime only for n=2) by full algebra factors)
* (k*5^n-1)/gcd(k-1,5-1) for all 1<=k<13
* (k*6^n-1)/gcd(k-1,6-1) for all 1<=k<84687
* (k*7^n-1)/gcd(k-1,7-1) for all 1<=k<457
* (k*8^n-1)/gcd(k-1,8-1) for all 1<=k<14 which is not cube (cubes k ruled out as only containing composites (k=1 has prime only for n=3) by full algebra factors)
* (k*9^n-1)/gcd(k-1,9-1) for all 1<=k<41 which is not square (squares k ruled out as only containing composites by full algebra factors)
* (k*10^n-1)/gcd(k-1,10-1) for all 1<=k<334
* (k*11^n-1)/gcd(k-1,11-1) for all 1<=k<5
* (k*12^n-1)/gcd(k-1,12-1) for all 1<=k<376 except 25, 27, 64, 300, 324 (these k ruled out as only containing composites by partial algebra factors)
* (k*2^n+1)/gcd(k+1,2-1) for all 1<=k<78557
* (k*3^n+1)/gcd(k+1,3-1) for all 1<=k<11047
* (k*4^n+1)/gcd(k+1,4-1) for all 1<=k<419
* (k*5^n+1)/gcd(k+1,5-1) for all 1<=k<7
* (k*6^n+1)/gcd(k+1,6-1) for all 1<=k<174308
* (k*7^n+1)/gcd(k+1,7-1) for all 1<=k<209
* (k*8^n+1)/gcd(k+1,8-1) for all 1<=k<47 which is not cube (cubes k ruled out as only containing composites (k=27 has prime only for n=1) by full algebra factors)
* (k*9^n+1)/gcd(k+1,9-1) for all 1<=k<31
* (k*10^n+1)/gcd(k+1,10-1) for all 1<=k<989
* (k*11^n+1)/gcd(k+1,11-1) for all 1<=k<5
* (k*12^n+1)/gcd(k+1,12-1) for all 1<=k<521

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2020-12-10 at 07:56
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 07:47   #1119
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22·691 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...XZqud2f_6r/pub

Update the file of Sierpinski conjectures to include the newest test limit of S30
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...GNvoCcffZt/pub

Update the file of Sierpinski conjectures to include the newest test limit of S53 k=4
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-16, 16:22   #1120
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22·691 Posts
Default

Status for b<=128, k<=128:

Sierpinski

Riesel

using "full numerical covering set", "full algebraic covering set", partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set" instead of "covering set", "full algebra factors", "partial algebra factors"
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-18, 18:05   #1121
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

22×691 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
Status for b<=128, k<=128:

Sierpinski

Riesel

using "full numerical covering set", "full algebraic covering set", partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set" instead of "covering set", "full algebra factors", "partial algebra factors"
If two or three of "full numerical covering set", "full algebraic covering set", "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set" occur simultaneously, then the order is "full numerical covering set" --> "full algebraic covering set" --> "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set"

e.g.

8*125^n+1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

8*125^n-1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

(361*4^n-1)/3 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

343*8^n-1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

(100*16^n-1)/3 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

81*1024^n-1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

(49*9^n-1)/8 is both "full numerical covering set" and "full algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

4*14^n-1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

4*29^n-1 is both "full numerical covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

(9*19^n-1)/2 is both "full numerical covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full numerical covering set"

4*9^n-1 is both "full algebraic covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full algebraic covering set"

(1*9^n-1)/8 is both "full algebraic covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full algebraic covering set"

9*4^n-1 is both "full algebraic covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full algebraic covering set"

(3*9^n-1)/8 is both "full algebraic covering set" and "partial numerical / partial algebraic covering set", then we use "full algebraic covering set"

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2020-12-18 at 18:10
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-21, 11:10   #1122
sweety439
 
Nov 2016

53148 Posts
Default

The formula is:

Sierpinski problem base b (b>=2): (k*b^n+1)/gcd(k+1, b-1)
Riesel problem base b (b>=2): (k*b^n-1)/gcd(k-1, b-1)

The lowest k (k>=1) found to have a NUMERIC covering set for Sierpinski/Riesel problems bases 2<=b<=2500 and b = 4096, 8192, 16384, 32768, 65536:

Sierpinski problems
Riesel problems

All k (k>=1) below the lowest k found to have a NUMERIC covering set must have a prime including multiples of the base (MOB) but excluding the k which can be ruled out as composite for all n >= 1 (by full covering set with all or partial algebraic factors) (for the examples, see post #871)

All n must be >= 1
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The dual Sierpinski/Riesel problem sweety439 sweety439 13 2020-12-23 23:56
Semiprime and n-almost prime candidate for the k's with algebra for the Sierpinski/Riesel problem sweety439 sweety439 11 2020-09-23 01:42
The reverse Sierpinski/Riesel problem sweety439 sweety439 20 2020-07-03 17:22
Sierpinski/ Riesel bases 6 to 18 robert44444uk Conjectures 'R Us 139 2007-12-17 05:17
Sierpinski/Riesel Base 10 rogue Conjectures 'R Us 11 2007-12-17 05:08

All times are UTC. The time now is 16:14.

Sun Jan 17 16:14:53 UTC 2021 up 45 days, 12:26, 0 users, load averages: 2.71, 2.59, 2.51

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.