mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Data

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-06-14, 10:05   #23
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

52×229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
This equals (2^2^25-1)(2^2^25+1).
Since when F25 is full factored?
Okay, maybe my mistake. I thought that 2ab-1 could be factored by (2a-1) x (1+2a+22a+23a+...+2(b-1)a)

Edit: So, nevermind I guess it is still easy to construct one with 2pq-1?

Last fiddled with by retina on 2014-06-14 at 10:09
retina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 16:40   #24
BudgieJane
 
BudgieJane's Avatar
 
"Jane Sullivan"
Jan 2011
Beckenham, UK

2·32·13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
Then there's that pesky thing called a dictionary

probable  
1. likely to occur or prove true
2. having more evidence for than against, or evidence that inclines the mind to belief but leaves some room for doubt.
3. affording ground for belief.

So by definition, it is not completely factored.
Then there's that other pesky thing called a definition: A probable prime is defined as a number that has passed a probable prime test.
BudgieJane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 18:45   #25
Gordon
 
Gordon's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

7648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BudgieJane View Post
Then there's that other pesky thing called a definition: A probable prime is defined as a number that has passed a probable prime test.
Yep, probable, see my previous dictionary definition.

This number is 100% NOT competely factored, you can dress it up however you want, but the facts don't lie.
Gordon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 22:00   #26
alpertron
 
alpertron's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Buenos Aires, Argentina

52A16 Posts
Default

Well, if you want me to be completely pedantic, if you know that the Mersenne number shown is not 100% completely factored, that means that the 173528-digit pseudoprime is composite. What is your proof?
alpertron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 22:12   #27
Gordon
 
Gordon's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

50010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alpertron View Post
Well, if you want me to be completely pedantic, if you know that the Mersenne number shown is not 100% completely factored, that means that the 173528-digit pseudoprime is composite. What is your proof?
That's just it you see, I don't need proof of anything, I'm not the one making the unverifiable claim, remember your claim was

"...completely factorized"

So for that to be true there can be no PRP rubbish spouted, show all the factors else you are making a false and misleading claim.

Amazing how many people on here struggle with simple English and seem to believe that

Probable == Definitively

It doesn't...
Gordon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 01:11   #28
MatWur-S530113
 
MatWur-S530113's Avatar
 
Apr 2007
Spessart/Germany

2·34 Posts
Default

Congratz Dario, nice found. Your prp is now listet as #6 of Henri Lifchitz's page of Mersenne cofactors:
http://www.primenumbers.net/prptop/s...&action=Search

@Gordon: maybe an expression like '(prp-)completet' is more accurate, but everyone who is interestet in factoring such large M-numbers knows, that a complete factorization of a M-number with an exponent ~500k will have one or more prp's involved. Simply compare the size of the largest proven prime cofactor of a M-number (I don't know the size, I think somewhere 1000-2000 bits) with the size of this M-number. Do you expectet 500 factors with average size of ~1000 bits and all factors are proven as prime (with primo or so)? And the complete thread is talking about "looking for prp's". See f.e.:
http://www.mersenne.ca/prp.php?show=...ponent=1000000

Dario's prp is already included

mfg
Matthias
MatWur-S530113 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 10:32   #29
Gordon
 
Gordon's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

22×53 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatWur-S530113 View Post

[snip]

that a complete factorization of a M-number with an exponent ~500k will have one or more prp's involved. Simply compare the size of the largest proven prime cofactor of a M-number (I don't know the size, I think somewhere 1000-2000 bits) with the size of this M-number. Do you expectet 500 factors with average size of ~1000 bits and all factors are proven as prime

[snip]
Precisely the point, you believe with some degree of confidence that it is prime, it may well be, we'll probably never know in our lifetimes.

All you do know with 100% certainty is that it is NOT FACTORED COMPLETELY

I am reminded of this famous quote

“The less people know, the more stubbornly they know it.” -Osho
Gordon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 12:11   #30
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

13·192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
All you do know with 100% certainty is that it is NOT FACTORED COMPLETELY
Consider the two statements:

A: We do NOT know with 100% certainty that it is factored completely.

B: We do know with 100% certainty that it is NOT factored completely.

Do you believe these two to be identical?
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 13:49   #31
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

52·229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
All you do know with 100% certainty is that it is NOT FACTORED COMPLETELY
Actually we don't know that. It might be completely factored, or it might not. We have a high confidence that it is completely factored. But we can't say for certainty that it is not.
retina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 17:06   #32
potonono
 
potonono's Avatar
 
Jun 2005
USA, IL

193 Posts
Default

I possibly more or less but not definitely rejected the idea that there is in no way any amount of uncertainty that I undeniably do or do not know that it is completely factored.
potonono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-16, 17:47   #33
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

746010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Actually we don't know that. It might be completely factored, or it might not. We have a high confidence that it is completely factored. But we can't say for certainty that it is not.
You are bandying words and undefined terminology.

Start by defining "completely factored".

My definition would be:

A number is completely factored when it is represented as the product
of primes.

Since the number in question has not been represented as the product of
primes, then it most definitely has NOT been completely factored.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Smallest exponent for mersenne not-factored preda PrimeNet 10 2018-11-04 00:47
Largest Mersenne Number Fully Factored? c10ck3r Data 49 2017-12-10 19:39
Possibility of a Fully-Factored Number Trejack FactorDB 7 2016-05-14 05:38
Estimating the number of primes in a partially-factored number CRGreathouse Probability & Probabilistic Number Theory 15 2014-08-13 18:46
Number of distinct prime factors of a Double Mersenne number aketilander Operazione Doppi Mersennes 1 2012-11-09 21:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 15:56.

Fri Sep 18 15:56:03 UTC 2020 up 8 days, 13:07, 1 user, load averages: 1.53, 1.54, 1.59

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.