-   storflyt32 (
-   -   Except for the last page, the previous thread became a bit long. (

storflyt32 2017-01-23 03:06

Except for the last page, the previous thread became a bit long.
If possible, I could edit the thread title.


Using ecm here and it needed 432312 out of 2097152 curves and took a while.

storflyt32 2017-01-23 10:45



Returning back to the first from the second, here it became a close call.

Apparently quite difficult here, but also good factors.

Needed 1987549 out of 2097152 curves when using ecm and took a while.

storflyt32 2017-01-27 10:02




It should be on Page 1 there and also becomes that when next checking.

The P35 and P42 and also the P33 and P44 there.

Make it all together and it should be that above.

Trying to factor the C152 as a whole, it comes up with the P33, but next pressing it wrong and needs a redo.

I will have it later on, but perhaps I should leave the rest as an exercise.

storflyt32 2017-01-28 18:35

Pondering a possible logoff and logon of the computer right now because of an overcommitment.


P34 = 9137310948603306186646517110437709

Pressing the wrong button once again, it needs a redo and next ends up on its heels and will not do.

I could get back at it, but right now my fingers is close to not willing anymore.

Except for that, perhaps not the best of words above, but the shopping trip made for a strain.

storflyt32 2017-01-30 11:37


This small number has a PRP1071 in the other end from the C1133 of 2^4096+1.

Not reported yet.

storflyt32 2017-02-01 13:05


Did the assignment here of this number listed as "U".

Also should be added the note around that this next shows up as being composite when using Yafu.

storflyt32 2017-02-04 01:35


This one did not make it with ecm using 2^21 curves.

Giving it another try in the usual way.

storflyt32 2017-02-08 00:34



What if it became the first and third here and "next" the second and last here, both separately, in the first link?

The rest, or remaining part in the second link above.

The fact that the third and last together in the first link could make for a quite difficult one (C93).

This slipped me right now, but at least could give it a try.

storflyt32 2017-02-08 03:09



Yes, doable this time, but needed at least two main attempts in order to get a clean factorization.

83760 relations being needed. SIQS elapsed time = 3167.4432 seconds.

Now I am off to bed.

storflyt32 2017-02-08 19:33


P39 = 217902523569237243124596155172342967247

P45 = 896582962507993039136406963757171629375241721

Again, loose factors here, or for this one.

Only makes me curious, of course.

storflyt32 2017-02-09 01:24


This one blew because it became the wrong way of running, namely in a window.

Adding the P9 for now, but lost much of the day here and it was probably two more factors and next down to a C130.

Edit: Staying with the P27 in the buffer, the second factor could take a couple more hours.

Ending back at Windows 32 bits for now, because of other problems, I do not know if or whether this became my last post here,
or even the answer here.

I could leave the machine running and perhaps report the result back tomorrow, but except that is what goes, or perhaps is happening right now.


Not any multiply this time either, because here it took quite some time and perhaps is close to what I could get when on 32 bit Windows.

But here also a prime number when flipping around and doing it the opposite way, so perhaps also of some importance here.

Next those restarts as well and should tell that I do not recognize the factors here.

These were not supposedly what I am was doing and for now not ending up in my list.

Beware the wolf, or either it could be about number theory here, or perhaps the prime number that was being missed.

Becomes another story, except for perhaps Pierre de Fermat meeting up with Marin Mersenne himself and next that both adding and subtracting a little,
could perhaps yield some results.

I will add the first name here as well, but next still funny.

Next should add that we perhaps could be soon having a new theory for that of living as well, except for perhaps chewing and next throwing a couple of things away.

Much or more of the needed factors probably ended up on my 64 bits partition, for as long as it could last. but next apparently nothing more.

Rather than question such a thing as numbers itself, perhaps that of number theory could be doing it even better, because then we could know what it is all about.

Again that of the Cunningham project in one of my files, but next only the listing for that of a P96 or so, except for the number itself.

Definitely a bit of tedious, but perhaps could make it to the FDB in the long term, except for perhaps not having all the details, or making it a complete sequence.

If perhaps listed, these factors could perhaps help for that of a possible understanding, if not perhaps add to the whole piece.

But next that it perhaps should also mean Loria here as well and again needs checking in with my logs.


Here perhaps rather and next that it took a long time on 32 bits Windows.

Total factoring time = 98114.6922 seconds

Edit: Flips around the opposite way as well and here also the possible result.


Here perhaps not the highest priority either for each such task, except for have it done.

Adding this time, because here it become a successful factorization.

Forum versus fora, if not any quasilledback either.

Forget that.


Not for free here either, and spending a bit of time and resources here.

Anyway, here just a little problem being noticed.



Here I key in that number above, and next get the other number instead, for still adding the P40, for already known, but that it ends up in the wrong place.

Here it should be the number just above, but rather getting the 1101... number instead, and for only my eyes, still not any blanks or asterisks ("*") for that of possible multiplication.

Any suggestions welcome, because here perhaps an error of sorts.

Should tell that I may have been doing it wrong a couple of times here, for still the asterisk it could be, and my apologies only here, for just let it slipping.

Kind of embedded it could be, for perhaps not any hidden either, at least only an error for just making, when also the thing that could be happening.

One suggestion could be that of refreshment of a line, for just blank, when still the asterisk it could be in between, for only multiplying a couple of numbers.

The problem is that if I make it just X*Y for that of an input line, and next double-clicking with the mouse, only marking the first number here, for still not the second number,
for only the whole or complete line it should be.

Here needs a fix in order to get that problem sorted, because perhaps only numbers should be allowed for that of input.

All times are UTC. The time now is 02:35.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.