![]() |
|
|
#881 | |
|
Aug 2006
10111010110112 Posts |
Quote:
n-digit examples; how well does this hold in practice? There are 0, 3, 11, 12, 43, 94, 239, 566, 1710 such primes with 1, 2, ..., 9 digits. The formula predicts 2, 3, 5, 12, 28, 70, 181, 475, 1266 primes; not too bad, perhaps, though biased on the low side. Maybe with the next correction term, the -1 in the denominator? That gives 3, 3, 6, 13, 31, 76, 193, 502, 1331. This is an asymptotic density of something like n^0.477, so maybe somewhat rarer than palindromatic primes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#882 | |
|
Aug 2006
3·1,993 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#883 |
|
Aug 2006
3·1,993 Posts |
Here's a 266-digit one:
Code:
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111494999 |
|
|
|
|
|
#884 |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
100000110000002 Posts |
Code:
(14:37) gp > findrec([11,23,47,95,191,383,767]) Recurrence relation is a(n) = 3a(n-1) - 2a(n-2). 3 d.f. %63 = [3, -2]~ (14:39) gp > findrec([29,59,119,239,479]) Recurrence relation is a(n) = 3a(n-1) - 2a(n-2). 1 d.f. %66 = [3, -2]~ (14:39) gp > findrec([1,3,7,15,31,63,127]) Recurrence relation is a(n) = 3a(n-1) - 2a(n-2). Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2010-08-25 at 19:32 |
|
|
|
|
|
#885 | |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
26×131 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#886 | |
|
Aug 2006
3·1,993 Posts |
Quote:
Code:
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111491141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#887 | |
|
Aug 2006
3×1,993 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#888 |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
26×131 Posts |
if we prove all exceptions that aren't knocked out by others have a sequence of the same form and that series of that form starting with an exception can't have a 2^p-1 prime then we can knock out all primes that have form of that have sequence that start at an exception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#889 | |||
|
Aug 2006
10111010110112 Posts |
Quote:
I assume that "knocked out" means that, in some sense, the number is guaranteed to not be the exponent of a Mersenne prime. But what determines if it's knocked out or not? Quote:
Quote:
But let me try something. Let's say that a number is "knocked out" if it is a member of one of the sequences S1, S2, S3, ..., Sk. Further, let's suppose that the sequences are, like A055010, exponential integer sequences, where each term is roughly twice the one before it. And let's look at large numbers, say exponents at least a million. Suppose we want to find all Mersenne exponents between 1,000,000 and 1,100,000 by this method. (We know from Slowinski & Gage that there are none, but we're testing this!) Now, by our assumptions, a given sequence Sj will remove about lg (1100000/1000000) ≈ 0.13 primes from the list. Since there are about 100,000 members, we'll need a minimum of > 720,000 sequences to clear the list. Not one sequence or three sequences; not even a hundred. Three-quarters of a million sequences! And that's just to clear a small part of a small range; a larger one would take many more. Further, if there's overlap, you'll need more. So if you don't want to use millions of sequences, make sure your method doesn't follow my assumptions. Last fiddled with by CRGreathouse on 2010-08-25 at 20:12 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#890 |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
20C016 Posts |
I realized that my idea takes a lot but if we can come up with something it's like a sieve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#891 |
|
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
24·3·5·7 Posts |
Another try at predicting the next Mersenne? I think there are figures that place it at around 19M to 20M digits. I believe this was stated somewhere in the Prime Pages.
Last fiddled with by 3.14159 on 2010-08-25 at 22:13 |
|
|
|
![]() |
| 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 |