![]() |
|
|
#298 | |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101×103 Posts |
Quote:
Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#299 | ||
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101×103 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Rogue, See the above quote. KEP has already taken Sierp base 27. Would you still like to do the remaining k on Riesel base 27 and perhaps go ahead with Riesel base 28? Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2008-05-09 at 21:24 Reason: Stupid admin made an incorrect statement. See what should have been said below. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#300 |
|
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
18D016 Posts |
I missed his reservation. I'll still take the Riesel base 27. I'll also take Riesel base 26.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#301 | |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2·3·7·23 Posts |
Quote:
![]() KEP! Last fiddled with by KEP on 2008-05-09 at 14:47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#302 | |
|
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
635210 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#303 | ||||
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101·103 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm sorry guys. I had double-checked my web pages yesterday because there have been so many updates the last several days. They were correct but I made a complete mis-statement and reversed what I should have said to Rogue about KEP's reservation. Even though the web pages had it reflected correctly, here is what I said: Quote:
Quote:
So, KEP please keep your reservation and don't lose so much work. Rogue, if you wouldn't mind taking SIERPINSKI base 27 and leaving Riesel for KEP, that's actually how I updated the web pages yesterday. And KEP, I had still shown you as having reserved RIESEL base 27 on the pages yesterday. It was my misstatement in the thread here that caused the problem. Rogue, based on taking Sierp base 27, do you still want Riesel base 26? Both Sierp and Riesel are available for base 26. Sorry again... Gary |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
#304 |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2×3×7×23 Posts |
@ Gary:
You're forgiven, we can all make mistakes. I'll keep my Riesel Base 27 reservation, and in seconds from now I'll start sieving again. Optimal sieve depth has been reached for Sierpinski Base 12, so I'll do LLR on 1 core. So to sum up, following is work that I do: 1. Test Sierpinski Base 12 up to n=250K or prime found 2. Test Riesel Base 27 up to n=1M or prime found 3. Test Sierpinski Base 19 up to n=100K or all k's primed Thanks. By the way Gary, I read your statements about using NewPGen, I really has a hard time seing how sieving a fixed n using the increment can save a lot of work and help remove candidates over billions or maybe even trillions. But if you test it out using NewPGen, then please let me know. Of course its always faster if we test a trillion k to n=2,500, which would leave about 40,000,000 candidates remaining. However due to sieve limits in srsieve, the only option availeable will be to sieve and then run WinPFGW or LLR through the remaining candidates of the approximately 40M candidates remaining. This want be much of an issue, but we sure need some script or program that can remove the candidates from a main file containing all the k/n pairs remaining at n=2,500. In this main file we need to change the remaining candidates to the new n value by search and replace and then replace the sieve depth with 0, before starting a new sieve and eventually running LLR or WinPFGW, and then loop the process. Maybe I should produce a more elaborate report on my ideas, but at least I hope this made sence. I know it will require a lot of manual work though ... but it may still be faster than bringing down only a million k's to n=25,000 each day for either of the Base 3 conjectures. But I really hasn't tested that way out yet. Also we has to consider if there will be any k limits when using NewPGen like there e.g. is when using multiple k's in srsieve.Regards KEP Ps. Maybe someone knows developers that can combine srsieve, WinPFGW, NewPGen, sr2sieve and other wishfull sievers, which can accept the fact that they remove primes and keeps composites and use the most nescessary codings to provide certain proves of primes aswell as fast sieving for "removing" or skipping composite k's faster and save them for testing by next n since they were not prime yet .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#305 |
|
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
24×397 Posts |
OK, then I'll take Sierpinski base 27.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#306 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101000101000112 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#307 |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2·3·7·23 Posts |
Here is 22 primes for sierpinski base 19:
389404*19^10013+1 275586*19^10026+1 364744*19^10027+1 19036*19^10034+1 339634*19^10075+1 543406*19^10106+1 554706*19^10114+1 642324*19^10133+1 741084*19^10135+1 230536*19^10138+1 480564*19^10139+1 238534*19^10143+1 178594*19^10169+1 690138*19^10169+1 583876*19^10172+1 134386*19^10184+1 557826*19^10230+1 416944*19^10237+1 651604*19^10237+1 124734*19^10271+1 592614*19^10271+1 545494*19^10313+1 I've now begun a sieving of the range up to n=25,000. I expect to see further primes faster in a week or so. But hey only 1,590 primes to go . Working hard. The Base 12 Sierpinski is at 404*12^109474+1 no prime yet. Also Base 27 Riesel is still sieving on 2 cores. Have fun and take care everyone.KEP! |
|
|
|
|
|
#308 | |
|
Jan 2005
479 Posts |
A small update on Riesel base 24 here:
The following k/n pairs are prime: Quote:
One mob was eliminated: 976*24^19189-1 also got 23424*24^19188-1 I’ve checked upto 25k now |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 1107 | 2021-07-26 18:37 |
| Bases 501-1030 reservations/statuses/primes | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 3913 | 2021-07-26 09:58 |
| Bases 251-500 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 2300 | 2021-07-25 07:38 |
| Bases 101-250 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 905 | 2021-07-18 16:55 |
| Bases 33-100 reservations/statuses/primes | Siemelink | Conjectures 'R Us | 1691 | 2021-07-06 18:50 |