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

 2021-12-06, 06:45 #1365 yoyo     Oct 2006 Berlin, Germany 23×79 Posts I'll take bases 60, 61, 63, 65, 66 67, 68, 69.
 2021-12-06, 17:15 #1366 EdH     "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 2×11×191 Posts @garmbois: I'm looking at your plot data in post #1369 and wondering if I'm missing something. Some of your plots include the prime itself (e.g. 67 and 79 include (67, 1) and (79, 1) respectively), while 71 and 73 do not include themselves. From my limited viewing, the attached graphs appear to follow the posted data. Obviously, I can enter these values (or remove them) for consistency myself for my "play," but, is there a reason they exist for some and not others, that I'm just missing?
2021-12-06, 18:14   #1367
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

2·3·7·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yoyo I'll take bases 60, 61, 63, 65, 66 67, 68, 69.
Thank you very much.
This is fantastic, the calculations will really go much faster for these bases !

2021-12-06, 18:25   #1368
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

2×3×7×17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by EdH @garmbois: I'm looking at your plot data in post #1369 and wondering if I'm missing something. Some of your plots include the prime itself (e.g. 67 and 79 include (67, 1) and (79, 1) respectively), while 71 and 73 do not include themselves. From my limited viewing, the attached graphs appear to follow the posted data. Obviously, I can enter these values (or remove them) for consistency myself for my "play," but, is there a reason they exist for some and not others, that I'm just missing?

Congratulations for noticing this !

The explanation is simple : bases 67 and 79 are included in our project and bases 71 and 73 are not yet included in our project.
And when I wrote my analysis program, I only scanned the bases included in the project.
I judged that the amount of data for the other bases must be much too small to be of interest.
But maybe I was wrong ?
In any case, this was only the first attempt at this new analysis.
But to extend this kind of work, it will take a lot of time.
I don't really know how many bases are needed to notice something (all bases up to 100, 200, 1000 ?), or even if there is something to notice ?

 2021-12-06, 19:54 #1369 EdH     "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 2·11·191 Posts Thanks, Jean-Luc! Is base 73 being worked by anyone? (I didn't see any mention in the thread.) If I don't hear an affirmative, I'll do some work there, but I don't know how active I will be.
 2021-12-06, 21:59 #1370 garambois     "Garambois Jean-Luc" Oct 2011 France 10110010102 Posts To my knowledge, no one is currently working on the 73 base.
2021-12-07, 00:57   #1371
EdH

"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009

2·11·191 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois To my knowledge, no one is currently working on the 73 base.
I'll work on it, but there are some larger exponents that are already finished that the db elves wouldn't have been involved in until near termination. The following exponents are all terminated:
Code:
73
61
47
41
37
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
7
5
4
3
2
1

2021-12-07, 01:39   #1372
RichD

Sep 2008
Kansas

11×317 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by EdH ... but there are some larger exponents that are already finished that the db elves wouldn't have been involved in until near termination.
I remember starting on some bases, maybe 69-73, and only got to exponent 30s or 40s before abandoning my preliminary work. Whoever takes them won't have as much work to do to get them initialized.

2021-12-07, 03:16   #1373
EdH

"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009

2×11×191 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by RichD I remember starting on some bases, maybe 69-73, and only got to exponent 30s or 40s before abandoning my preliminary work. Whoever takes them won't have as much work to do to get them initialized.
Thanks! Just so I'm not stepping on toes. . .

 2021-12-20, 11:39 #1374 garambois     "Garambois Jean-Luc" Oct 2011 France 71410 Posts Page updated. Many thanks to all for your help ! Added base : 69. Still no non-trivial end of sequence for bases 276, 552. New bases reserved for yoyo : 60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69. Our project now has 112 bases and 10262 sequences. There has been a lot of progress in the calculations for this update, as the yoyo statistics have been high the last two weeks : 31 sequences ended with one non-trivial (56^61).
 2021-12-26, 16:55 #1375 EdH     "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 2·11·191 Posts Is anyone working base 70 or 71?

 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 08:24.

Fri Jan 28 08:24:22 UTC 2022 up 189 days, 2:53, 2 users, load averages: 0.71, 1.25, 1.42