20200809, 15:19  #397  
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5×13×53 Posts 
Quote:
Are there more data points for consideration? A couple things interesting to me: 1. ATM, 2^544 has a "3" downdriver. 2. 2^543 shed 69 digits from index 9 to index 10 (15182 dd). 

20200810, 16:39  #398  
Oct 2011
367 Posts 
Quote:
Unfortunately, I have not yet had the time to study this aspect of the sequences for the different bases. But I note these remarks for some time to come when I will start this kind of studies... I am working very intensively on prime numbers and their occurrence in the different sequences and it takes all my time. I finally have the right analysis programs. And everything corresponds perfectly to the results of EdH ! I think I will be able to present you with several new conjectures in the next few days, but before I do, I'd rather check them out. I will take some time to update the page very soon. So I have a question for Ed : @EdH : I understand you're working on the 2^i sequences with i>540. Should I add a line from 2^540 to 559 ? Otherwise, if possible the first priority would be to compute the first 4 indexes of the sequences 2^(36*k), 2^(60*k), 2^(70*k), with k integer and the first 3 indexes of the sequences 2^(70*k), 2^(72*k), 2^(90*k), with k integer and of course 36*k>540, 60*k>540, 70*k>540... (because when it's <540, we've already got them !) This has something to do with the conjectures I will be stating in a few days. For example, I observe that the prime number 5 is found in the decompositions of terms at indexes 1 to 4 of sequences that begin with 2^(36*k) or that the prime number 19 is found in the decompositions of terms at indexes 1 to 3 of sequences that begin with 2^(72*k). But I think that this must stop after a certain rank, so I would like to prove it... 

20200810, 18:41  #399 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5·13·53 Posts 
@JeanLuc: I will suspend my sequential march and look at your new request. These may be bordering on my capabilities quite quickly, though.
You have 70*k listed as both 4 and 3 indexes. Is one of these different? When you refer to indexes 1 through 4 are these the index number or the total number of factored lines so that you have the latest aliquot sum on index number 5? 
20200810, 19:01  #400 
Oct 2011
557_{8} Posts 
Sorry, for 70*k : 3 indexes and not 4.
Index 0 is 2^(70*k). index 1 is s(2^(70*k)) index 2 is s(s(2^(70*k))) index 3 is s(s(s(2^(70*k)))) So index 3 means 4 factored lines and index 4 means 5 factored lines. Thanks a lot Ed ! 
20200810, 23:17  #401 
"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California
2×11×53 Posts 

20200811, 12:45  #402 
Oct 2011
367 Posts 
OK, page updated.
Many thanks to all... 
20200811, 22:03  #403 
Sep 2008
Kansas
3^{2}·353 Posts 
30^43 has surely merged. No way I could get that sequence to a C158 is such a short time.

20200812, 03:23  #404 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5·13·53 Posts 

20200812, 07:27  #405 
Oct 2011
367 Posts 
OK, thanks, I'll add this merger in the next update !

20200812, 07:59  #406  
Oct 2011
16F_{16} Posts 
Quote:
As announced in post #337 cited above, here is the attached pdf which shows the occurrences of prime numbers <1000 for all the bases. Here, we consider globally all the terms of all the sequences for a base. It is rather the prime numbers 31 and 127 which are distinguished from the others. But this is understandable since they are the prime numbers of the drivers... I didn't fill in the column called "integers from 1 to 10^4". Downloading all the complete sequences on db would have been much too laborious ! That said, it would certainly be extremely interesting to redo for all the integers all this prime number analysis work that we did for only the integer powers. Some very interesting things would certainly appear. I am talking about all the works, and not only those shown on this pdf and the pdf of post #337 (works also showing multiple apparitions of a prime number in a single sequence by indicating the indexes of appearance). Now that the programs are written, it would be easy to do the analyses for all the integers. The problem is the downloading of all the terms of all the sequences... 

20200813, 11:38  #407 
May 2009
Russia, Moscow
2505_{10} Posts 
I'm done with n=13, all sequences after 13^80 now are >120 digits with >110 digits composites passed ECM work.

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 