OMG, I cannot spam anymore in the Forum Feedback where my question was answered!!!!!!!!!!!111111

[gophne]

Originally Posted by science_man_88

Your same inputs part has nothing to do with it. If you input is n-2 Fermat's output would be for n.

Correct.

But what should then happen is for "equivalent" inputs to be run...that is (n-2) for the first case and n for Fermat.

Any volunteers. I do not want to do it myself, because my expertise is under suspicion (no problem), so I think whatever I come up with might be questionable right from the starting blocks.

So I think it would be better to come from more established contributors.

[gophne]

Originally Posted by ATH

It was proven to you, but you do not accept the proof, so there is not much else we can do.

You agreed your algorithm gave the same false positives as I showed for fermat pseudoprime base 2 right? So why is it so hard to believe they are the same?

Try and find different beginners guides to modular arithmetic, because you do not understand it yet.

POST RESULTS FOR ALL TO SEE.

[gophne]

Originally Posted by 10metreh

Here is some Pari code to run your test for numbers n+2 from 1 to 10000, and print the false positives along with a counter:

x=0;for(n=-1,9998,if(isprime(n+2)==0&&(2^n-1)%(n+2)==(n+1)/2,x++;print(x" "n+2)))

Here is its output:

1 341
2 561
3 645
4 1105
5 1387
6 1729
7 1905
8 2047
9 2465
10 2701
11 2821
12 3277
13 4033
14 4369
15 4371
16 4681
17 5461
18 6601
19 7957
20 8321
21 8481
22 8911

Here is some code to run Fermat's test to base 2 for n from 1 to 10000, and similarly print the false positives:

x=0;for(n=1,10000,if(isprime(n)==0&&(2^(n-1))%n==1,x++;print(x" "n)))

Here is its output:

1 341
2 561
3 645
4 1105
5 1387
6 1729
7 1905
8 2047
9 2465
10 2701
11 2821
12 3277
13 4033
14 4369
15 4371
16 4681
17 5461
18 6601
19 7957
20 8321
21 8481
22 8911

Does that look at all familiar?

Hi 10metreh

OMG. It is exactly THE SAME.

I accept now that the algorithm is a "clone" and that it is a repitition of Fermat. I shall not persue this matter any further.

I apologise to all the contributors that tried to unsuccessfully point this out to me for wasting your time all the while.

Now all that remains, if anybody might be interested, would be how I derived "my" algorithm. I did not reference to Fermat.

Oh my goodness!

[MisterBitcoin]

Originally Posted by gophne

POST RESULTS FOR ALL TO SEE.

[gophne]

Hi MisterBitcoin

Hahaha

[flagrantflowers]

We need to develop some kind of operational manual for dealing with people who appear, at first glance, to be having an acutely difficult time with … . To ban people in such a state does a disservice to someone who is seeking a community for whatever comfort.

I see a lot of people at risk who are mocked and dismissed. Is engaging the right method; doubtful.

I do not have a solution but I think we need to do better.

[ET_]

Originally Posted by flagrantflowers

I do not have a solution but I think we need to do better.

...then you are part of the problem... just kidding.

[LaurV]

Yay!