mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > And now for something completely different

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-04-06, 17:30   #12
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

2·3·23·31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
In theory, yes. Practically, no, -- you will not find 221444161 in A046063.

Not only A046063 is visibly not calculated that far - we do know that it was not taken anywhere near that far
Nor here
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-06, 17:32   #13
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

20CF16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
In theory, yes. Practically, no, -- you will not find 221444161 in A046063.

Not only A046063 is visibly not calculated that far - we do know that it was not taken anywhere near that far
the b file listing has it to over 99 million so over a third of the way there.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-06, 22:13   #14
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

2·4,967 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
the b file listing has it to over 99 million so over a third of the way there.
Indeed, sounds easy enough - and you will have no trouble telling me what is the n such that A046063(n) = 221444161 ? Right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulunderwood View Post
Nor here
No need to look there, really. Just see the OP message?
...But you don't know how long that calculation took (and only for that single value). But you can know: just find the next value n > 10000076282 so that p(n) is PRP. Or the previous n (i.e. slightly below 10^10). And the same question: what is n :: A046063(n) = 10000076282 ?
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-07, 00:47   #15
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

2·3·23·31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
No need to look there, really. Just see the OP message?
...But you don't know how long that calculation took (and only for that single value). But you can know: just find the next value n > 10000076282 so that p(n) is PRP. Or the previous n (i.e. slightly below 10^10). And the same question: what is n :: A046063(n) = 10000076282 ?
I guess it took a single core an hour to calculate numbpart(10000076282) with Pari. With a sieve, that is 76282 values to check, (but then you used Arb.) Am I close? -- without trying to gauge it for myself.

Edit: I am revising my guess to 62 hours, based on:

Code:
time echo "numbpart(10^10/2^8);" | gp -q

real	0m8.736s
user	0m8.468s
sys	0m0.016s

time echo "numbpart(10^10/2^7);" | gp -q

real	0m29.226s
user	0m28.488s
sys	0m0.016s

time echo "numbpart(10^10/2^6);" | gp -q

real	1m41.768s
user	1m41.884s
sys	0m0.020s

? 28.488/8.468
3.3641946150212564950401511572980632971
? 101.884/28.488
3.5763830384723392305532153889356922213
? (3.6)^6*102/3600
61.675499520000000000000000000000000000

Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2017-04-07 at 01:24
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-18, 16:15   #16
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

993410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulunderwood View Post
I am looking forward to your record-breaking 16,569 digit partitions prime's proof
Done
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-20, 22:55   #17
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

2·3·23·31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
Done
Congrats for a speedy proof
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-21, 18:36   #18
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

2·4,967 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulunderwood View Post
I guess it took a single core an hour to calculate numbpart(10000076282) with Pari. With a sieve, that is 76282 values to check, (but then you used Arb.) Am I close? -- without trying to gauge it for myself.

Edit: I am revising my guess to 62 hours, based on:
It is much faster to calculate p(n) values in Arb, as well as immediately abandon those that are divisible by small primes. However, it is still much longer than you estimated.

To revise my own estimate I ran a small search for an even larger PRP p(n), n > 14180076200 (a randomly chosen starting point*). It took ~10 hrs x 80 threads, so it is not a very trivial computation. The new largest known PRP is p(14180123587),which has 132646 decimal digits.
_________________
*Note that the decimal size of p(n) is known to be ~ \(1.114 \sqrt n\)
(due to Hardy and Ramanujan, 1918)
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-21, 19:10   #19
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

102668 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
It is much faster to calculate p(n) values in Arb, as well as immediately abandon those that are divisible by small primes. However, it is still much longer than you estimated.

To revise my own estimate I ran a small search for an even larger PRP p(n), n > 14180076200 (a randomly chosen starting point*). It took ~10 hrs x 80 threads, so it is not a very trivial computation. The new largest known PRP is p(14180123587),which has 132646 decimal digits.
_________________
*Note that the decimal size of p(n) is known to be ~ \(1.114 \sqrt n\)
(due to Hardy and Ramanujan, 1918)
Thanks for relaying the constant. Congrats for the new PRP
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 19:58   #20
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

2·4,967 Posts
Lightbulb

A couple of larger PRPs was also found, the larger slightly above 200000 decimal digits.
numbpart(32235776596), 200002 digit size
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 20:06   #21
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

10B616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
A couple of larger PRPs was also found, the larger slightly above 200000 decimal digits.
numbpart(32235776596), 200002 digit size
Congrats again

How long does it take ARB to generate such a number?

Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2017-04-26 at 20:09
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 20:53   #22
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

2·4,967 Posts
Default

Only 0.85s to generate number.
~13 minutes to check with PFGW.

In this size range you would expect to need to check 460000 candidates (of which you can sieve away 95-98%, but you'd still need to run a few thousand PRP tests). So the estimate is ~10^3 cpu-hours to find one.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A useful function. JM Montolio A Miscellaneous Math 28 2018-03-08 14:29
phi function rula Homework Help 3 2017-01-18 01:41
Have a look at the partition numbers fivemack Factoring 57 2007-12-28 10:37
Partition number congruences fivemack Math 0 2007-05-18 19:39
Linux/SUSE noob trouble - Resize partition OmbooHankvald Linux 19 2005-11-18 10:39

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:33.


Sun Sep 25 10:33:48 UTC 2022 up 38 days, 8:02, 0 users, load averages: 0.75, 0.85, 0.97

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔