But even if they are a team, their maths stinks (or is it the maths of the writer of the article ?) : "It's a number that is so long that if you typed it out at 10 characters per inch, it would stretch 20 to 30 miles long, depending on what font you were using." No if typed out at 10 c / inch it will be 52 miles whatever the font (because they defined the font as using an inch for 10 characters. Then they repeat the typesetting fault seen in other articles : "2p1" instead of "2^{p}1" or "2^p1" or even "2**p1". Two other pearls in the article : "In fact, tens of thousands have participated in the search by downloading a free program from GIMPS, which keeps track of which numbers are tested and eliminated, and sends out untested candidate numbers to the GIMPS community for factoring. The process of factoring one number can take a computer as long as two months, Smith explained. But joining forces via the Internet makes the search possible." and"GIMPS tested the number by factoring it using a different algorithm on various kinds of computers. "We had to sweat it out for two weeks until they verified it," Smith said.", they factored it initially and during the verification run ?
Jacob
Last fiddled with by S485122 on 20081110 at 18:31
