20090724, 10:09  #23 
Mar 2006
Germany
2×3×11×43 Posts 
a remark to the link from S.Hoogendoorn:
there're two errors in his sequences: 209376 has an error at index 862 209760 has an error at index 1208 although he updated his page on 20090717 the last time, he seems no noticed anything about this Fourm or the FactorDatabase or my Summarypages! i'll keep an eye on his page with the seqs 200k210k. 
20100211, 22:11  #24  
Jul 2003
So Cal
2^{3}×11×23 Posts 
Quote:
I have just completed bring 680700K to 100 digits. I am now running the 18 numbers below 100K that are (or were, some are done) at <100 digits. After this, I'll probably move on to 660680K. 

20100212, 17:37  #26  
Nov 2008
100100010010_{2} Posts 
Quote:
(BTW: Steer clear of 675600  it's mine. Although it's above 100 digits, it might look tempting.) Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 20100212 at 17:39 

20100212, 20:41  #27 
Aug 2009
somewhere
11000101_{2} Posts 
My bot brought up all 600700k to 90 digits, and some to 100 digits.
Now it's joining the 800k project. I'll try to announce its plans here more thoroughly. Last fiddled with by RobertS on 20100212 at 20:44 Reason: spelling 
20100212, 22:00  #28 
Jul 2003
So Cal
7E8_{16} Posts 

20100320, 08:38  #29 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2^{3}·11·23 Posts 
600k700k are all at >=100 digits. I've started at 900k.

20100320, 11:29  #30 
Nov 2008
2·3^{3}·43 Posts 
Great work. Once that and Subproject #5 are done, then all of the aliquot sequences up to 1M except the 400k range (Wieb Bosma) will be above 100 digits. After that, we will be faced with the 1M2M range, which is mostly at 71 digits with some ranges above that. Should we take that straight to 100 or do it in two parts (to 80 or 90 first)?
Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 20100320 at 11:29 
20100320, 11:44  #31  
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
10253_{8} Posts 
Quote:


20100320, 13:09  #32 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT)
2×5×569 Posts 
Where do we stop going upwards? I had always thought 1M but people seem to want to go further. I do think though if we go rid of the upto 100 digits drives then I think that we would lose customers or at least limit our growth as a project.

20100320, 15:56  #33 
Nov 2008
2·3^{3}·43 Posts 
I think we should continue taking sequences to 100 digits because it produces faster results and more terminations, but it I think it will become boring within a few years and 110 digits will be the most popular height to take sequences to. By then we'll probably have started taking the 10k sequences to 120 digits...
Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 20100320 at 15:57 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
New ranges at OBD  ET_  Operation Billion Digits  4  20100713 11:34 
Ranges  Xyzzy  LMH > 100M  49  20070619 03:00 
All Available Ranges  hbock  Lone Mersenne Hunters  0  20031027 22:54 
Available Ranges below 60 bit  hbock  Lone Mersenne Hunters  13  20031024 23:40 
Ranges for P4s  geoff  Lone Mersenne Hunters  1  20030905 18:13 