mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Five or Bust - The Dual Sierpinski Problem

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-10-20, 12:09   #1
sweety439
 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

47×79 Posts
Default Extended dual Sierpinski problem (for 78557<k<271129)

For the dual Sierpinski problem for 78557<k<271129, I found that 2^42210+91549 is (probable) prime, but I cannot find a (probable) prime for 2^n+79309, can someone find it?

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2020-10-20 at 12:09
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 18:48   #2
philmoore
 
philmoore's Avatar
 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.

19×59 Posts
Default

Are there any other unresolved k values < 271129 for which you do not have a probable prime?
philmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-21, 10:25   #3
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)

23·19·41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
For the dual Sierpinski problem for 78557<k<271129, I found that 2^42210+91549 is (probable) prime, but I cannot find a (probable) prime for 2^n+79309, can someone find it?
Not much use posting that without the search limits
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-21, 15:37   #4
sweety439
 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

1110100000012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philmoore View Post
Are there any other unresolved k values < 271129 for which you do not have a probable prime?
Code:
2^unknown+79309
2^9+79817
2^42210+91549 (PRP)
2^394+131179
2^21+152267
2^1032+156511
2^57+163187
2^1038+200749
2^44+202705
2^16+209611
2^27+222113
2^unknown+225931
2^11+227723
2^3+229673
2^38+237019
2^60+238411
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-03-06, 21:22   #5
thunkii
 
Mar 2023

7 Posts
Default

I have proven 2^42210+91549 as prime and uploaded the certificate to factordb (testing out new hardware).
thunkii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-07-13, 06:43   #6
Jinyuan Wang
 
Jan 2020

610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
For the dual Sierpinski problem for 78557<k<271129, I found that 2^42210+91549 is (probable) prime, but I cannot find a (probable) prime for 2^n+79309, can someone find it?
For k=79309, I checked every n < 500000 and found no primes of the the form 2^n+79309
Jinyuan Wang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-07-31, 15:37   #7
Alex
 
Alex's Avatar
 
"Alex_soldier (GIMPS)"
Aug 2020
www.Mersenne.ru

2·3·7 Posts
Question PRP search: 2^n+79309

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinyuan Wang View Post
For k=79309, I checked every n < 500000 and found no primes of the the form 2^n+79309
Hello, Jinyuan Wang.

Are you planning to continue checking further?
I'm sieving the range n<10M now (currently I am at p=370M: ~193K candidates left).
Next I`m planning to increase checked nmax > 500K.

Does anybody want to contribute too?
It may be called a part of Extended Dual Sierpinski problem
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-08-01, 01:09   #8
ikari
 
ikari's Avatar
 
"Riley"
Sep 2021
Canada

2×3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Does anybody want to contribute too?
It may be called a part of Extended Dual Sierpinski problem
I like the sound of that! I tried searching for a probable prime of the form 2^n + 79309 a while ago, but found nothing (I think I searched up to n = 100000, but I don't quite remember).

The Dual Sierpiński Problem has been worked on extensively, but has anyone taken a stab at the Extended Dual Sierpiński Problem before? I haven't been able to find anything. I'll try looking for more k values (78557 < k < 271129) with no known (probable) primes of the form 2^n + k. If I find any, I'll make an update, and if anyone else does, I'd certainly be interested to know them.

Last fiddled with by ikari on 2023-08-01 at 02:00
ikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-08-01, 12:37   #9
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS

311716 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
Code:
2^unknown+79309
2^9+79817
2^42210+91549 (PRP)
2^394+131179
2^21+152267
2^1032+156511
2^57+163187
2^1038+200749
2^44+202705
2^16+209611
2^27+222113
2^unknown+225931
2^11+227723
2^3+229673
2^38+237019
2^60+238411
This is a misleading list. It only lists primes/prp's for k's that remain on the "regular" 2nd Sierpinski problems, which include the Prime Sierpinski and Extended Sierpinski searches at PrimeGrid.

It is no way is a complete list of the search of ALL k's for 78557<k<271129 for the extended dual Sierpinski problem, which is what the original problem was in this forum for k<78557. I'm referring to the one that was "almost" proven by finding prp's for all k<78557 of the form 2^n+k.

Many years ago, I searched all k's of the form 2^n+k for 78557<k<271129 to n=25K. I showed that there were 64 k's remaining at n=25K including k=79309, 91549, and 225931 shown here. I would want to double-check a few things before saying for sure that the count is correct. The effort was done with a modified starting bases PFGW script from CRUS.

If anyone is interested in the primes/prp's/remaining from the effort, I can post them. I have no interest in taking it further.
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-08-01, 14:06   #10
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)

185816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gd_barnes View Post
This is a misleading list. It only lists primes/prp's for k's that remain on the "regular" 2nd Sierpinski problems, which include the Prime Sierpinski and Extended Sierpinski searches at PrimeGrid.

It is no way is a complete list of the search of ALL k's for 78557<k<271129 for the extended dual Sierpinski problem, which is what the original problem was in this forum for k<78557. I'm referring to the one that was "almost" proven by finding prp's for all k<78557 of the form 2^n+k.

Many years ago, I searched all k's of the form 2^n+k for 78557<k<271129 to n=25K. I showed that there were 64 k's remaining at n=25K including k=79309, 91549, and 225931 shown here. I would want to double-check a few things before saying for sure that the count is correct. The effort was done with a modified starting bases PFGW script from CRUS.

If anyone is interested in the primes/prp's/remaining from the effort, I can post them. I have no interest in taking it further.
I feel like one of us is being brain dead(quite possibly me). Don't you need a prime for either 2^n+k or k*2^n+1 for the dual Sierpinski problem? If so starting from the remaining ks for the extended Sierpinski problem seems logical as that project has already searched the k*2^n+1 form pretty far. The dual Sierpinski problem isn't just 2^n+k. That is the representation of negative n values.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpi%C5%84ski_number explains it fairly well.


edit: After writing this post I realized that you were possibly referring to it being a misleading list for just the 2^n + k side. This is true although it may be a correct list for the dual Sierpinski problem.

Last fiddled with by henryzz on 2023-08-01 at 14:08
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2023-08-01, 14:18   #11
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS

3·59·71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
I feel like one of us is being brain dead(quite possibly me). Don't you need a prime for either 2^n+k or k*2^n+1 for the dual Sierpinski problem? If so starting from the remaining ks for the extended Sierpinski problem seems logical as that project has already searched the k*2^n+1 form pretty far. The dual Sierpinski problem isn't just 2^n+k. That is the representation of negative n values.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpi%C5%84ski_number explains it fairly well.


edit: After writing this post I realized that you were possibly referring to it being a misleading list for just the 2^n + k side. This is true although it may be a correct list for the dual Sierpinski problem.
I'm confused.

The original "five or bust" dual Sierpinski problem on this forum here, as defined by Phil Moore, had primes for all k's 2^n+k, not just ones that didn't have primes for k*2^n+1. See the project definition here:
https://mersenneforum.org/showpost.p...91&postcount=1

Most of the larger primes they discovered had k's that already had primes for k*2^n+1 long before the project started.

Defining a problem that allows finding either k*b^n+1 or b^n*k as a way to eliminate k's make such problems very easy and not interesting.

I stand by what I said. The post that I responded to is misleading in the context of being posted in this forum.
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All the rational solutions for the Basel problem extended. Charles Kusniec Charles Kusniec 0 2022-10-23 01:40
A Sierpinski/Riesel-like problem sweety439 sweety439 1276 2022-08-08 17:22
Dual Sierpinski/Riesel conjectures in prime bases sweety439 sweety439 1 2022-07-10 21:56
The dual Sierpinski/Riesel problem sweety439 sweety439 15 2022-01-26 23:43
Dual Sierpinski/Riesel prime sweety439 sweety439 0 2016-12-07 15:01

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:41.


Sun Oct 1 22:41:04 UTC 2023 up 18 days, 20:23, 0 users, load averages: 1.40, 1.11, 0.94

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔