Number 59649589127497217 is a factor of Fermat number F7 - Page 5

LaurV · 2013-11-16, 09:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by literka

Only the word "kinda" doesn't match.

I said kinda, not kinda.

literka · 2013-11-16, 09:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

I said kinda, not kinda.

Thanks for correction. I did not want to misquote you.

literka · 2013-11-16, 09:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by c10ck3r

Imagine that members of this forum know "ein bissyen" of mathematics, and can recognize within seconds that your proofs are rehashing known results using more effort than would be required by any one of several methods. Throughout this thread you have disregarded the advice of computer science professionals and mathematicians as they attempted to point this out to you. Your first sentence in this quote references questions "which require lot of work to answer" (sic) seems, to members of this forum especially, as rather counter-intuitive given the amount of work you put in to prove that a known factor is indeed a known factor. There have been a number of occasions in which you have posted statements as fact and have had them disproven by professionals in the field, and yet you refuse to see this.
If you feel that you have been disrespected on this forum, you may go elsewhere, if you are so inclined. Otherwise, if you wake up and recognize that the people that have responded have been making valid points the entire time, and get the urge to learn why your proof is, for all practical purposes, pointless, feel free to ask logical questions and to take the advice of the senior members of this forum. Also, if Robert Silverman, CRGreathouse, WBlipp, Batalov, et al. suggest reading a certain paper, DO SO! Comprehension of the sources will usually provide an understanding of why certain things work or don't work in mathematics, and how to apply them.

If you are doing this what you adviced me to do then DON'T DO SO!. Find area interesting for you and unsolved problem interesting for you and try to solve it. People will tell you that your work is worthless and this is what they will think. It is because everybody thinks that only his area of interest is worthy to pay attentions.

cmd · 2013-11-16, 11:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by literka

If you are doing this what you adviced me to do then DON'T DO SO!. Find area interesting for you and unsolved problem interesting for you and try to solve it. People will tell you that your work is worthless and this is what they will think. It is because everybody thinks that only his area of interest is worthy to pay attentions.

we estimate you brother ..

but

It also

axn · 2013-11-16, 15:39

@Literka: After step 10, you should b multiplying by 512, not 256.

LaurV · 2013-11-16, 16:00

What?? After all this fight, you want to say that he has a mistake in that beautiful demonstration?

(read as: did you actually wasted the time to click and read? man, you must be really free and bored! I may change my opinion about you...

)

literka · 2013-11-16, 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by axn

@Literka: After step 10, you should b multiplying by 512, not 256.

Thank you. I corrected. If you agree I can include short note at the end of a page of the form "I am grateful to ..... for reading and correcting text".
In the case you agree, I would need your name.

BudgieJane · 2013-11-16, 17:21

I am amazed that so much has been written in this thread about the factorization of F7. As far as I am concerned you pass the number into YAFU, wait a short while, and pick up the factors out the other end. End of story, pass on to the next number.

Since you will have done this one a few years ago, with all the others you will have done in the meantime you should be looking at F77 now, or even F777, and certainly not F7.

literka · 2013-11-16, 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by BudgieJane

I am amazed that so much has been written in this thread about the factorization of F7. As far as I am concerned you pass the number into YAFU, wait a short while, and pick up the factors out the other end. End of story, pass on to the next number.

Yes, it is a wonderful idea. I waited less than 1 sec. for a result.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BudgieJane

Since you will have done this one a few years ago, with all the others you will have done in the meantime you should be looking at F77 now, or even F777, and certainly not F7.

I don't like number 7. I would better do F88.

c10ck3r · 2013-11-16, 19:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by literka

I don't like number 7. I would better do F88.

F88 would take too long to write out manually. Might I suggest F20 instead? Its a nice, round number, and much smaller :)
If you make any usable* progress, I will pay your website's hosting costs for a year.

*Usable progress will be determined and prizes awarded at the discretion of the challenge creator.

Batalov · 2013-11-16, 20:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by literka

Thank you. I corrected. If you agree I can include short note at the end of a page of the form "I am grateful to ..... for reading and correcting text".
In the case you agree, I would need your name.

His name is Anand Nair and if you will fail to mention his contribution, your page will be a forgery.

Quote:

Originally Posted by literka

BTW. No matter how much you write these proofs (i.e. about F5, F6, and F7) will stay my proofs

Even this is no longer true. You didn't even have a proof until Anand Nair corrected you.

2013-11-16, 17:21	#52
BudgieJane "Jane Sullivan" Jan 2011 Beckenham, UK 2·7·17 Posts	I am amazed that so much has been written in this thread about the factorization of F7. As far as I am concerned you pass the number into YAFU, wait a short while, and pick up the factors out the other end. End of story, pass on to the next number. Since you will have done this one a few years ago, with all the others you will have done in the meantime you should be looking at F77 now, or even F777, and certainly not F7. Last fiddled with by BudgieJane on 2013-11-16 at 17:22 Reason: Correction of grammatical error.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
On Fermat's Last Number	c10ck3r	Miscellaneous Math	14	2012-11-29 20:36
Fermat number F6=18446744073709551617 is a composite number. Proof.	literka	Factoring	5	2012-01-30 12:28
Fermat number and Modulo for searching divisors	CyD	Factoring	4	2011-05-31 11:24
Fermat number factors	Citrix	Math	35	2007-01-23 23:17
New Fermat number divisor!	ET_	Factoring	1	2004-10-08 03:34

2013-11-16, 15:39	#49
axn Jun 2003 12ED₁₆ Posts	@Literka: After step 10, you should b multiplying by 512, not 256.

2013-11-16, 16:00	#50
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 3⁴×113 Posts	What?? After all this fight, you want to say that he has a mistake in that beautiful demonstration? (read as: did you actually wasted the time to click and read? man, you must be really free and bored! I may change my opinion about you... )