![]() |
|
|
#188 | |
|
Aug 2006
3·1,993 Posts |
Quote:
I had a script generate random odds and test them until one had >= 20 bases to which it was a pseudoprime. The first I generated at that size happened to have 49 (or 50, or 48, depending on how you count it) bases. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#189 | |
|
Aug 2006
3·1,993 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#190 | |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
20C016 Posts |
Quote:
think i know a way to simplify this lol Vec(string1,string2,etc.) at least to the most common things you get annoyed with people asking then vector each string separately and walk through it does Vec(input())[i] with the individually vectored strings from the vector above. This might take a lot of variables though. that might shorten the code some(might increase time though) the hard part is putting the placement of these into variables etc. and then making sense of it all to write the code needed. Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2010-08-10 at 23:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#191 |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
203008 Posts |
I could also see doing something like
Code:
for(n=2,100,if(Vec(input())==stringN + n,print(function to do it)) |
|
|
|
|
|
#192 | |
|
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
24×3×5×7 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#193 | |||
|
Aug 2006
3×1,993 Posts |
Quote:
Ideally, the program wouldn't directly ask for user input at all. That way I could write a program that checks mersenneforum.org for updates, read those updates into a string, and send the string to the program, which would either output a program or give some sort of an error. So if it read a post that said Quote:
Code:
userscript_mersenneforum_post83529()={
forprime(p=1,100,print(p))
};
addhelp(userscript_mersenneforum_post83529, "userscript_mersenneforum_post83529(): Lists the primes p with 1 <= p <= 100. Assumes that 100 <= default(primelimit).")
Quote:
Code:
*** user error: cannot determine program from description |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#194 |
|
Aug 2006
135338 Posts |
I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "general composite". In post #187 you define it to mean the same as "composite", but in that case why did you say "general composite" in post #157 rather than just "composite"?
I had the feeling that you had some special meaning like "generated uniformly at random" or "algorithmically irreducible". At the least, I supposed that you would exclude SNFS-type numbers. In the end, I suppose only you can tell me what you meant in #157. |
|
|
|
|
|
#195 | |
|
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
110100100002 Posts |
Quote:
Ex: 63727551014401 = 5644801 * 11289601 vs. 289481332205123 = 7056779 * 41021737 Here are the false witness results: The latter: No false witness below 1 million. The former: Too many false witnesses to count. (Begins 1, 5, 7, 10, ..) And this has been the consistent result for all comparisons between a 2nd kind Cunningham and a general semiprime. An explanation why is a Google search away, I guess. My best guess is that the 2nd kind Cunninghams I am using have many prime factors when 1 is subtracted from them, and that is somehow correlated to the amount of false witnesses that they produce. Last fiddled with by 3.14159 on 2010-08-11 at 00:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#196 |
|
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
24×3×5×7 Posts |
I'm going to try 2nd kind Cunninghams that lack so many prime factors whenever 1 is subtracted from them, to test my bullshit idea.
Debunked - Even when the only prime divisor that was necessarily there is two, here's the false witness sequence: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 32, 36, 42, 49, 50, 54, 63, 64, 72, 75, 81, 84, 85, 96, 98, 112, 128, 142, 144, 145, 150, 162, 168, 170, 175, 185, 189, 190, 191, 196, 200, 213, 216, 235, 252, 255, 256, 263, 285, 288, 290, 293, 294, 295, 300, 305, 307, 323, 324, 336, 337, 340, 343, 350, 358, 359, 378, 382, 384, 392, 401, 409, 419, 421, 426, 435, 441, 448, 450, 451, 454, 461, 486, 497, 503, 512, 521, 523, 525, 526, 533, 537, 541, 551, 554, 555, 567, 568, 570, 576, 578, 580, 583, 600, 605, 610, 625, 629, 631, 646, 648, 665, 672, 674, 675, 680, 681, 682, 689, 698, 700, 703, 705, 715, 722, 727, 729, 740, 745, 751, 756, 760, 764, 765, 784, 789, 799, 800, 802, ... Whatever gives 2p^2-p so many false witnesses.. Last fiddled with by 3.14159 on 2010-08-11 at 00:54 |
|
|
|
|
|
#197 | |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
838410 Posts |
Quote:
I need to learn to read more lol. maybe if it finds something it can't decipher it could suggest questioning about what it can't figure out. a program making a program seems like a virus but this idea sounds cool. one thing I've thought of is using a text to speech translator like what Microsoft has in Windows(though if possible better) and instead of turning it to speech interpret its meaning and spit out a program based on what it can understand(hopefully a lot). Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2010-08-11 at 01:27 |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Why do I sometimes see all the <> formatting commands when I quote or edit? | cheesehead | Forum Feedback | 3 | 2013-05-25 12:56 |
| Passing commands to PARI on Windows | James Heinrich | Software | 2 | 2012-05-13 19:19 |
| Ubiquity commands | Mini-Geek | Aliquot Sequences | 1 | 2009-09-22 19:33 |
| 64-bit Pari? | CRGreathouse | Software | 2 | 2009-03-13 04:22 |
| Are these commands correct? | jasong | Linux | 2 | 2007-10-18 23:40 |