
View Poll Results: Where is the new (maybe not) prime?  
18.019.0 M  3  2.11%  
19.020.0 M  7  4.93%  
20.021.0 M  11  7.75%  
21.022.0 M  10  7.04%  
Elsewhere, missed in DC, below 18 M  10  7.04%  
14.4kbps or less to 19.2kbps  2  1.41%  
21.6kbps to 26.4kbps  1  0.70%  
28.8kbps to 36.0kbps  3  2.11%  
38.4kbps to 52.8kbps  14  9.86%  
better than dialup  37  26.06%  
Less than 16 million  13  9.15%  
16 million  5  3.52%  
17 million  5  3.52%  
18 million  9  6.34%  
19 million or more  12  8.45%  
Voters: 142. You may not vote on this poll 

Thread Tools 
20030601, 20:54  #12 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
2^{2}·1,709 Posts 
Someone has figured out each of the 3 previous Mersenne primes. Its been hard to hide its identity with all that data embedded in the Primenet reports.

20030601, 20:57  #13 
Aug 2002
2·101 Posts 
Heh, you just need to have Primenet put a fake report in for the reported prime. It's easy to run a "okay, which one was there yesterday, and isn't today" comparison.

20030601, 21:26  #14  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
2^{2}·1,709 Posts 
Quote:


20030601, 22:58  #15 
Aug 2002
2·101 Posts 
Ah, so maybe what I have isn't the new prime. I have a script that takes all exponents in the nofactor database that are in the Primenet LL ranges, eliminates those in hrf3, lucas_v, the Primenet assigned report and the Primenet completed report, and reports what's left. I have a list of those that I ran a couple of days ago. I ran it again today, and there was only one new exponent on that list, so I figured that must be it. But if a fake entry is put in the completed report for the new prime, then there must be some other explanation for it.

20030602, 00:22  #16  
Aug 2002
2 Posts 
New Prime
Quote:


20030602, 01:20  #17 
Aug 2002
DF_{16} Posts 
Wow, this IS exciting! Reminds me of why I started doing this project back in Aug of 1997. :D :D :D
Congrats to whomever's machine went bonkers with alarms/noises (hopefully it wasn't a Borg, so you could hear the soundeffects!)!!!! 8) 8) 8) 8) 
20030602, 19:16  #18 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.
1,117 Posts 
So George, aren't you glad you didn't change the banner on the GIMPS webpage? ("Finding the 5 Largest Known Primes")

20030602, 21:42  #19  
Sep 2002
Oeiras, Portugal
10101100010_{2} Posts 
From the GIMPS Status Page (milestones):
Quote:


20030602, 22:32  #20 
Sep 2002
2^{3}×37 Posts 
what is the etc on verifing the prime?

20030602, 23:14  #21  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
2^{2}·1,709 Posts 
Quote:
Gbvalor (Glucas) only has a midrange Athlon machine. It would have taken him a month. For M#39 he had access to a multiCPU Itanium system. 

20030603, 03:34  #22 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
15264_{8} Posts 
Ernst will complete his official test on June 20 or 21. My unofficial test will complete on the 11th. We will be comparing residues every 1,000,000 iterations.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Is Moore's Law wrong, or is it wrongheaded (6th time around)  jasong  jasong  12  20160527 11:01 
what I do wrong  pepi37  Linux  4  20150712 09:13 
Am I doing it wrong?  kracker  PrimeNet  3  20120701 22:35 
something wrong with my RAM?  ixfd64  Hardware  13  20100717 20:49 
something wrong here?  ixfd64  Lounge  2  20070917 13:20 