![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
4,751 Posts |
![]()
When was the last time that the largest known prime number was not a Mersenne prime?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
11001001101102 Posts |
![]()
1989, according to http://primes.utm.edu/notes/by_year.html#table2
391581*2^216193-1 was found to be prime by the Amdahl Six while Slowinski's Cray search was working its way from M216091 to M756839. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
2·43·89 Posts |
![]()
im using a factoring programme that i just downloaded and decided to try factoring the largest known prime,2^43112609-1, and it says that it has factors,what could i be doing wrong or what could be wrong with the programme?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
47·233 Posts |
![]() Quote:
The LL is a conclusive test. There were enough different runs on different hardware with different code to prove there was no error in the testing. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Aug 2006
22×3×499 Posts |
![]()
Does it tell you the factors? The numbers involved are small enough (5 MB) that you could just take the gcd with a program like Pari to prove to yourself that the 'factors' don't actually divide 2^43112609-1. (Pari takes ~20 seconds on my machine to do the gcd, or less if the factor is significantly smaller than the square root of the number.)
Last fiddled with by CRGreathouse on 2008-12-10 at 17:20 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
394410 Posts |
![]()
i think its factor 3 or something like that,i think ive figured it out,it seems to close down when it finds a factor.this is an example of what happens.
Please enter the exponent to be factored: 2^43112609 Now enter start bit depth : 1 Finally enter end bit depth : 70 Sieving from 2^2 up to 2^70... k=13853571, d=1194527127847231 50.003 bit depth the "k=13853571, d=1194527127847231 50.003 bit depth" is the part that confused me,i thought this meant it had found a factor.im factoring a number at the minute,ive factored it up until,2^100 and it still hasnt found a factor,should i try factor it further or maybe try another method,if so what? thanks for all your help. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
11×389 Posts |
![]()
There's the problem. It was asking for the exponent, and you told it 2^43112609, not 43112609. 2^2^43112609-1 is indeed composite, since its exponent is composite (specifically, its exponent is divisible by 2, so 2^2-1=3 divides 2^2^43112609-1).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenn...ersenne_primes Last fiddled with by TimSorbet on 2008-12-10 at 21:27 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
47×233 Posts |
![]() Quote:
The fact that you are to 2^100 tells me that, you are likely to not be factoring the number that you think that you are. It would take a tremendously long time to get to that level. (Decades ?) No, don't try that number anymore. Once it has passed 4 different LL tests on 4 different computers, using at least 3 different programs, IT IS PRIME. Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2008-12-11 at 07:38 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Banned
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia
43×113 Posts |
![]() Quote:
![]() Mind that it is slower than Prime95 (unless you run 8 concurrent threads, of course). The number he is checking is definitely prime. Luigi |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
9,157 Posts |
![]()
sorry i should of highlighted what what part i entered, when you open the program it comes up 2^ and all you do is enter the exponent.ive realised that (2^43112609)-1 doesnt have a factor.however my new number doesnt have one up as far as 2^60,what test should i carry out on it now or should i try and factor it a bit more?
Thanks. |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Nov 2008
2×33×43 Posts |
![]()
It has two factors: 1 and 2^43112609-1. I think you meant proper factors.
Sorry about this one, I thought I just had to put it in. Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 2008-12-11 at 12:52 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
(M48) NEW MERSENNE PRIME! LARGEST PRIME NUMBER DISCOVERED! | dabaichi | News | 571 | 2020-10-26 11:02 |
Largest nonmersenne prime | Unregistered | Information & Answers | 38 | 2020-09-07 12:45 |
probable largest prime. | sudaprime | Miscellaneous Math | 11 | 2018-02-05 08:10 |
Largest 64 bit prime? | amcfarlane | Math | 6 | 2004-12-26 23:15 |
need Pentium 4s for 5th largest prime search (largest proth) | wfgarnett3 | Lounge | 7 | 2002-11-25 06:34 |