20200730, 21:02  #375  
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
3,373 Posts 
Quote:
Code:
2310^1:i1 merges with 1578:i4 

20200730, 21:43  #376 
"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California
2·5^{2}·23 Posts 

20200731, 12:00  #377 
"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City
3^{2}×43 Posts 
n=24 is done to i=20, and I'm releasing the sequences below that limit. Next, I'll bring n=21, i=70 to 80 up to C120 cofactors.

20200803, 09:32  #378 
Oct 2011
348_{10} Posts 
Sorry for the late update, but I just came back from my vacation...
Page updated. Thank you all for your hard work ! I ask you to please check if the updates concerning you are correct ? @EDH : I think we need to modify merges for 2310 and 30030. Code:
2310^1:i1 merges with 1578:i4 30030^1:i1 merges with 22518:i4 Code:
2310^1:i0 merges with 1578:i3 30030^1:i0 merges with 22518:i3 I will now be able to continue quietly to examine all the accumulated data. I will be refining and running my analysis algorithms over the next few days. I'll keep you informed if a conjecture should arise, hoping this time it's not already known ! 
20200803, 14:14  #379 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
3,373 Posts 
Welcome back, JeanLuc! I hope you had a great time!
You are correct about both merges. Now I have to find out why my program wasn't. I seem to recall correcting this already. Maybe I used an earlier (incorrect) version somehow. I stumbled around with a couple things in post 364 that might be of interest. I'm sure I don't have it written out properly, but I don't think the very last one is something that will actually turn up via data review, but it might just be a form of what you already found: Code:
Additionally, that a^{i}+1 is a factor of s(a^{(i*n)}) (n, a positive even integer) Of course, I might be way off with something. Last fiddled with by EdH on 20200917 at 14:17 
20200803, 16:07  #380 
Oct 2011
2^{2}×3×29 Posts 
Yes, I did see your posts #364 and #371 and I'll look into it.
But it's going to take me a few days to run the data analysis programs. The execution times are very long and I don't understand why. I'll try to shorten these execution times. I also think that to better notice things, I'll have to modify the program that gives the output : Code:
base 2 prime 197748738449921 exponent 265 base 2 prime 197748738449921 exponent 530 base 2 prime 242099935645987 exponent 198 base 2 prime 242099935645987 exponent 396 base 2 prime 332584516519201 exponent 19 base 2 prime 332584516519201 exponent 382 Code:
base 2 prime 197748738449921 exponent 265 at index 1 base 2 prime 197748738449921 exponent 530 at index 1 base 2 prime 242099935645987 exponent 198 at index 1 base 2 prime 242099935645987 exponent 396 at index 1 base 2 prime 332584516519201 exponent 19 at index 1 base 2 prime 332584516519201 exponent 382 at index 1 Code:
prime 197748738449921 shows up 2 times (265:i1, 530:i1). prime 242099935645987 shows up 2 times (198:i1, 396:i1). prime 332584516519201 shows up 2 times (191:i1, 382:i1). More curious : by manually and laboriously examining (hence the need to automatically examine) the data in your file attached to post #374, it even happens that a large prime number repeats itself twice in two terms at two indexes of the same sequence. And this may be a coincidence, but I prefer to be sure ! Then I also want to know if large prime numbers repeat more than twice in a single sequence and if so, at which indexes. 
20200803, 17:18  #381 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
3,373 Posts 
I will look into adding indices to my prime listings, but for the the smaller primes, it would cause trouble with lengths of the lines. Is there possibly a lower limit I could use. I think your example showed 10^7, possibly?
I can run the prime listing for a single base in a relatively quick fashion with my setup of bash scripts and compiled C++ program. The script divides the search regions into 8 processes to make use of 8 threads on an i7 and then combines the results for the final file. This helps with array sizes that quickly overrun available space in my program. I'm not sure what other analyses you might be doing. For a little while I was working with finding duplicate primes (>10^6) across the entire set of tables: Code:
allpbase11:prime 1000117 shows up 1 time(s) (44). allpbase13:prime 1000117 shows up 1 time(s) (40). allpbase2:prime 1000117 shows up 1 time(s) (396). allpbase14:prime 1000847 shows up 1 time(s) (31). allpbase2:prime 1000847 shows up 1 time(s) (328). allpbase3:prime 1000847 shows up 1 time(s) (104). allpbase15:prime 1001123 shows up 1 time(s) (12). allpbase2:prime 1001123 shows up 1 time(s) (300). allpbase10:prime 1002511 shows up 1 time(s) (15). allpbase1155:prime 1002511 shows up 1 time(s) (4). allpbase2:prime 1002511 shows up 1 time(s) (312). allpbase7:prime 1002511 shows up 1 time(s) (70). . . . Code:
allpbase10:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (33). allpbase11:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (24). allpbase13:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (42). allpbase14:prime 100049 shows up 2 time(s) (46, 89). allpbase15:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (12). allpbase2:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (303). allpbase21:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (28). allpbase385:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (4). allpbase6:prime 100049 shows up 2 time(s) (101, 135). allpbase7:prime 100049 shows up 1 time(s) (32). allpbase10:prime 100057 shows up 2 time(s) (33, 95). allpbase11:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (42). allpbase12:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (67). allpbase15:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (12). allpbase17:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (12). allpbase2:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (375). allpbase210:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (25). allpbase3:prime 100057 shows up 2 time(s) (204). allpbase5:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (16). allpbase510510:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (3). allpbase6:prime 100057 shows up 1 time(s) (81). allpbase7:prime 100057 shows up 3 time(s) (18, 96). allpbase11:prime 100103 shows up 1 time(s) (48). allpbase14:prime 100103 shows up 2 time(s) (43, 81). allpbase2:prime 100103 shows up 1 time(s) (346). allpbase496:prime 100103 shows up 1 time(s) (19). allpbase6:prime 100103 shows up 4 time(s) (29, 73, 81). allpbase7:prime 100103 shows up 2 time(s) (36, 50). . . . 
20200803, 20:46  #382 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
3,373 Posts 
I have added unique* index references. Here is a sample from base2primes:
Code:
prime 162259276829213363391578010288127 shows up 5 times (107:i1, 214:i1, 321:i1, 428:i1, 535:i1). prime 163537220852725398851434325720959 shows up 4 times (133:i1, 266:i1, 399:i1, 532:i1). prime 1282816117617265060453496956212169 shows up 2 times (247:i1, 494:i1). prime 2679895157783862814690027494144991 shows up 3 times (145:i1, 290:i1, 435:i1). prime 4982397651178256151338302204762057 shows up 2 times (231:i1, 462:i1). prime 73202300395158005845473537146974751 shows up 2 times (235:i1, 470:i1). prime 383725126655170964501315730676446647 shows up 2 times (263:i1, 526:i1). *Unique means that I do not list the same index of an exponent more than once, so if there is a prime with a power, it is listed only once. e.g. 2^7 at index 12 of a particular sequence would be listed as 2:i12 even though there were seven 2s represented. If the prime occurs on a subsequent index it is listed. The count (X times) still represents the total. Last fiddled with by EdH on 20200803 at 20:49 Reason: clarification 
20200804, 07:52  #383 
Oct 2011
2^{2}·3·29 Posts 
Yes, this is exactly the program I have in mind : a program that allows you to see unique indexes.
Your program execution time is much faster than mine. So I'm very interested in your new tables with indexes, like in your last post. But I finally have an idea that will allow me to greatly reduce the data analysis time and I will soon be able to quickly reproduce your calculations. See my next post to understand what I'm looking for... 
20200804, 08:42  #384 
Oct 2011
15C_{16} Posts 
I think I've come up with a new conjecture again.
I don't know if it's already known, please let me know if it is ? This new conjecture concerns on the other hand only one prime number for base 3, but what is new is that we have the presence of this prime number always in the decomposition of two consecutive terms of the sequence ! Here is the statement of the conjecture : For any aliquot sequence starting with a number of the form 3^(26*k), k integer, the prime number 398581 always appears in the decomposition of the terms of index 1 and index 2. This is a small conjecture which concerns only a particular case, but perhaps more general conjectures could be found. To find this, I proceeded as follows : 1) I found this line in the EdH tables : Code:
prime 398581 shows up 18 times (26, 52, 78, 104, 130, 156, 182, 208, 234). 2) I ran a program that makes the indexes appear and I saw this : Code:
base 3 prime 398581 exponent 26 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 26 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 52 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 52 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 78 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 78 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 104 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 104 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 130 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 130 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 156 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 156 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 182 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 182 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 208 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 208 at index 2 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 234 at index 1 base 3 prime 398581 exponent 234 at index 2 I'd like to try and find some more conjectures like that. We have to look at all the bases. But I'm not sure how to write the programs to spot this kind of case ! Maybe for a base, we have to find cases where the number of occurrences of the prime number is a multiple of the number of exponents for which the prime number appears ? In the example above, we have 18/9=2, so we have two indexes per sequence where the prime number 398581 appears and moreover, these indexes are consecutive ! Are there ratios of 3 (3 consecutive or not consecutive indexes), or more ? Answer in a few days or weeks... And certainly other unexpected things will appear ! 
20200804, 11:35  #385 
"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City
183_{16} Posts 
I've verified this conjecture up to 3^468. 797161 (2*3985811) also appears in index 1 of all of the sequences I tested with that starting value form. Did you find that in the ones you tested?
Last fiddled with by Happy5214 on 20200804 at 11:38 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Broken aliquot sequences  fivemack  FactorDB  45  20200516 15:22 
Broken aliquot sequences  schickel  FactorDB  18  20130612 16:09 
A new theorem about aliquot sequences  garambois  Aliquot Sequences  34  20120610 21:53 
poaching aliquot sequences...  Andi47  FactorDB  21  20111229 21:11 
New article on aliquot sequences  schickel  mersennewiki  0  20081230 07:07 