20061005, 22:41  #1 
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005
DB1_{16} Posts 
Question about Riesel and Sierpinski conjecture.
For those of you who don't know, there are two math projects trying to prove a conjecture. For Riesel Sieve, they're trying to prove that 509203 is the smallest Riesel number. A Riesel number is a number k, such that k*2^n1 is composite for all n. Seventeen or Bust is trying to prove the PLUS 1 version of the problem(I don't know what the conjectured Sierpenski number is.
Anyway, there are 910 kvalues left for the Sierpenski conjective, and 6970 values left for the Riesel conjecture. Now, here's where I let my ignorance show: The Riesel conjecture has gone from 254602 values to prove prime down to about 70, and the Sierpenski conjecture, which I believe started at a little under 40,000 values(I think), is now down to 910 values. My question is: Now that the number of values is so much lower, couldn't someone apply the same techniques used to find the Riesel and Sierpenski numbers, and use those techniques to study the numbers left over? Maybe finding something that the computers involved in the problem couldn't? As I said, I'm ignorant of these things. I'm thinking maybe the sieving programs have already implemented what I'm talking about, but I'm not sure. My knowledge of modular arithmetic is very limited, although I hope to learn at some point. 
20061006, 06:17  #2  
"William"
May 2003
New Haven
2^{2}×3^{2}×5×13 Posts 
Quote:
This original method doesn't start with candidate Riesel and Sierpinski numbers, so having a small number of candidates doesn't help. Now you might think about taking the remaining candidates and attempting to compose a covering set that was missed in the original process. To try this, you would start with the factorization of the smallish exponents and attempt to pick a covering set starting with these factors. If you try this, you will soon find that some of the exponents have smallest factors with dozens of digits, and any covering set will require a period that is much too long to figure out. Having figured that out, you might next think "surely it's not natural to have to go such large exponents  isn't that a hint that at least of some these might be unrecognized Riesel and Sierpinski numbers." You would be wrong, though. Many of the remaining candidates have pretty large partial covering sets. For example, the Sierpinski candidate 67607 has 712 out every 720 exponents divisible by a small prime. This scarcity of potential exponents means the candidates for primes grow rapidly. Combined with the increasing scarcity of primes as the numbers get larger, you expect to need to go very far to find a prime. I worked out a detailed estimate for Seventeen or Bust a few years ago, and they have actually been finding primes slightly faster than that estimate. So if there is any surprise about the number of remaining candidates, it has to be that the number is so small  no hint of unrecognized Riesel and Sierpinski numbers. So there doesn't seem to be anything to do but keep plugging away with the present methods. 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Very Prime Riesel and Sierpinski k  robert44444uk  Open Projects  587  20161113 15:26 
Sierpinski/ Riesel bases 6 to 18  robert44444uk  Conjectures 'R Us  139  20071217 05:17 
Sierpinski/Riesel Base 10  rogue  Conjectures 'R Us  11  20071217 05:08 
Sierpinski / Riesel  Base 23  michaf  Conjectures 'R Us  2  20071217 05:04 
Sierpinski / Riesel  Base 22  michaf  Conjectures 'R Us  49  20071217 05:03 