Which will happen first?

Uncwilly · 2004-09-15, 20:48

Which of the following milestones will happen first?

biwema · 2004-09-16, 08:03

I assume you mean "finding at least one factor of MM127 and prove the number composite".
Comlpletely factoring would be rather difficult...

edorajh · 2004-09-16, 11:26

I vote "M13466917 proved to be M39".

clowns789 · 2004-09-16, 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by edorajh

I vote "M13466917 proved to be M39".

How far are we from that? I think that we will find a factor for M1061 or find M42 first.

Mystwalker · 2004-09-16, 23:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by clowns789

How far are we from that? I think that we will find a factor for M1061 or find M42 first.

http://www.mersenne.org/status.htm:

Quote:

Countdown to proving M(13466917) is the 39th Mersenne Prime: 27,655

What really bothers me is "Countdown to testing all exponents below M(13466917) once: 3" - this hasn't changed more a long time.

Hurry up, you 3!!!

cheesehead · 2004-09-20, 08:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystwalker

What really bothers me is "Countdown to testing all exponents below M(13466917) once: 3" - this hasn't changed more a long time. http://mersenneforum.org/images/smil...ra/furious.gif Hurry up, you 3!!! http://mersenneforum.org/images/smilies/extra/rant.gif http://mersenneforum.org/images/smilies/extra/wink.gif

It may be helpful to keep in mind that if the assignments being handled by slow computers were instead handled by fast computers, the assignments that would formerly be assigned to those fast computers would go undone as long as the fast computers were diverted to the "slower" assignments -- a net loss for GIMPS because that would delay progress toward future milestones. IOW, it's better for GIMPS to proceed at an overall speed of 101 than at a speed of 100. :-)

Mystwalker · 2004-09-20, 18:51

I know that the current distribution is ideal for GIMPS (which - different from similar projects - doesn't put away a k once a prime is found) - nevertheless, that "3" disturbs me...

BTW, it has decreased to 2!

patrik · 2004-09-24, 17:52

Don't forget the error rate of 1.5%. There are about 400-500 exponents left that had a faulty first test (but we don't know yet which ones they are).

Terrence Law · 2004-10-15, 21:35

How about changing "MM127 factored" to "MM127 proven prime"?

Terrence Law · 2004-10-15, 21:37

I'm sure that it will be the VERY last of the four that the milestones will occur in order.

Terrence Law · 2004-10-15, 21:39

It seems very unlikely that someone would successfully find a factor for MM127.

View Poll Results: Of the following, which will be reported first?
M1061 factored	8	18.60%
MM127 factored	1	2.33%
'M42' found	24	55.81%
M13466917 proved to be M39	10	23.26%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

2004-09-15, 20:48	#1
Uncwilly 6809 > 6502 """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101×103 Posts 3·7·17·31 Posts	Which will happen first? Which of the following milestones will happen first?

2004-10-15, 21:35	#9
Terrence Law May 2004 2·37 Posts	MM127 proven prime. L-L testing MM127 How about changing "MM127 factored" to "MM127 proven prime"? Last fiddled with by Terrence Law on 2004-10-15 at 21:37

2004-10-15, 21:37	#10
Terrence Law May 2004 2×37 Posts	Change the sign or command to MM127 proven prime. I'm sure that it will be the VERY last of the four that the milestones will occur in order.

2004-10-15, 21:39	#11
Terrence Law May 2004 2×37 Posts	Factoring Depth. It seems very unlikely that someone would successfully find a factor for MM127.

2004-09-16, 08:03	#2
biwema Mar 2004 101111101₂ Posts	I assume you mean "finding at least one factor of MM127 and prove the number composite". Comlpletely factoring would be rather difficult...

2004-09-16, 11:26	#3
edorajh Oct 2003 Croatia 2³×3×19 Posts	I vote "M13466917 proved to be M39".

2004-09-20, 18:51	#7
Mystwalker Jul 2004 Potsdam, Germany 831₁₀ Posts	I know that the current distribution is ideal for GIMPS (which - different from similar projects - doesn't put away a k once a prime is found) - nevertheless, that "3" disturbs me... BTW, it has decreased to 2!

2004-09-24, 17:52	#8
patrik "Patrik Johansson" Aug 2002 Uppsala, Sweden 5²×17 Posts	Don't forget the error rate of 1.5%. There are about 400-500 exponents left that had a faulty first test (but we don't know yet which ones they are).

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What will happen?	RichardB	Information & Answers	16	2010-09-03 21:25