The ultimate prime test ?

Carl Fischbach · 2009-09-08, 05:06

Iv'e found an interesting algorithm that has proven, as far as I can easily test, that the following fermat pseudoprimes in base 2 are composite numbers.

The pseudoprimes are 341 561 645 1105 1387 1729 1905 2047
2465 2701 2821 3277

are all proven composites with this algorithm, but I cannot prove whether this algorithm will eliminate all base 2 pseudoprimes that exist.

You may question the proof, but it is quite simple and easy to follow.

I don't want to disclose the algorithim because it may have certain
amount of financial value.

I'm interested your opinion whether an algorithm of this type has any
financial value or has any copyright or patent protection possibilities.

If further testing shows all pseudoprimes, as far as can be tested
with this algorithm are proven composites, this algorithm could prove quite valuable.

Carl Fischbach · 2009-09-08, 06:07

I'd like to further add that this algorithm is an off shoot of the Fermat
pseudoprime equation and eliminates pseudoprimes and leaves only
primes as far as I have tested.

10metreh · 2009-09-08, 06:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Fischbach

Iv'e found an interesting algorithm that has proven, as far as I can easily test, that the following fermat pseudoprimes in base 2 are composite numbers.

Let me have the first guess at what it is:

Trial division.

Carl Fischbach · 2009-09-08, 06:31

Care to wager anything on that statement. I'll take any bets.

axn · 2009-09-08, 06:43

somebody care to compute the "crank score" on that first post?

Mini-Geek · 2009-09-08, 13:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by axn

somebody care to compute the "crank score" on that first post?

Sure, why not.

For brevity, I'm only including the criteria where he scores. (my comments bold, section headers underlined)

Subject and Claims
5 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory. (*)
5 points

10 points for stating that your ideas are of great financial, theoretical and/or spiritual value.
10 points

20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.
20 points

Hubris
10 points for claiming that your work is revolutionary, a "paradigm shift," or a simple idea missed by all but you.
10 points

Process and Proof
10 points for expecting others to disprove your result(s) rather than providing the proof yourself.
10 points

30 points for confusing examples and/or heuristics with mathematical proof.
30 points

Whining
10 points for expressing fear that your ideas will be stolen.
10 points

5+10+20+10+10+30+10=95

CRGreathouse · 2009-09-08, 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Fischbach

I'm interested your opinion whether an algorithm of this type has any
financial value or has any copyright or patent protection possibilities.

No; no; yes.

To clarify the second answer: algorithms are not subject to copyright, but a particular fixed form of an algorithm may be. (Case law on this goes all the way back to Baker v. Selden.)

Carl Fischbach · 2009-09-09, 00:13

I think I'm going to take this algorithm to Wolfram and see if they want to
explore it any further and I'll keep you posted.

flouran · 2009-09-09, 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Fischbach

I think I'm going to take this algorithm to Wolfram and see if they want to
explore it any further and I'll keep you posted.

Yes, because as we all know, Wolfram loves to waste his time writing useless programs that other people have invented before him

cheesehead · 2009-09-09, 01:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Fischbach

I don't want to disclose the algorithim because it may have certain amount of financial value.

You don't trust us ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Fischbach

I think I'm going to take this algorithm to Wolfram and see if they want to
explore it any further and I'll keep you posted.

... but you trust Wolfram ??

flouran · 2009-09-09, 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheesehead

You don't trust us ...
... but you trust Wolfram ??

Who said "Dr."Fischbach had to make sense?

2009-09-08, 05:06	#1
Carl Fischbach Oct 2007 2·17 Posts	The ultimate prime test ? Iv'e found an interesting algorithm that has proven, as far as I can easily test, that the following fermat pseudoprimes in base 2 are composite numbers. The pseudoprimes are 341 561 645 1105 1387 1729 1905 2047 2465 2701 2821 3277 are all proven composites with this algorithm, but I cannot prove whether this algorithm will eliminate all base 2 pseudoprimes that exist. You may question the proof, but it is quite simple and easy to follow. I don't want to disclose the algorithim because it may have certain amount of financial value. I'm interested your opinion whether an algorithm of this type has any financial value or has any copyright or patent protection possibilities. If further testing shows all pseudoprimes, as far as can be tested with this algorithm are proven composites, this algorithm could prove quite valuable.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ultimate EFF Prize Limit of GIMPS	jinydu	Lounge	49	2013-02-11 23:43
Prime 95, Vista 64bit Ultimate and Kapersky KIS7	Halo Jones	Software	0	2008-02-11 09:34
Ultimate gap-busting file	gd_barnes	Riesel Prime Search	26	2007-07-23 15:23
Silverman & Wagstaff on Joint Distribution of Ultimate and Penultimate Prime Factors	wblipp	Math	12	2006-04-02 18:40
Poll: Ultimate Limits of GIMPS	jinydu	Lounge	28	2005-11-13 13:22

2009-09-08, 06:07	#2
Carl Fischbach Oct 2007 100010₂ Posts	I'd like to further add that this algorithm is an off shoot of the Fermat pseudoprime equation and eliminates pseudoprimes and leaves only primes as far as I have tested.

2009-09-08, 06:31	#4
Carl Fischbach Oct 2007 2×17 Posts	Care to wager anything on that statement. I'll take any bets.

2009-09-08, 06:43	#5
axn Jun 2003 5,051 Posts	somebody care to compute the "crank score" on that first post?

2009-09-09, 00:13	#8
Carl Fischbach Oct 2007 2×17 Posts	I think I'm going to take this algorithm to Wolfram and see if they want to explore it any further and I'll keep you posted.