mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-10-14, 12:53   #34
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

10000110110102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfred View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
It is intuitively obvious that, if k is "sufficiently large", the smallest "2-brilliant" number n > 22k is n = p1*p2, where p1 = nextprime(2k) and p2 = nextprime(p1 + 1). Numerical evidence suggests that "sufficiently large" is k > 3. This notion "obviously" applies to any base.
Dr Sardonicus,

does this statement apply to largest 2-brilliant numbers in base 10?

If yes, please give an example.
No. The argument I had in mind only applies to the smallest 2-brilliant number N > b2k, an even power of the base b > 1. The argument is a triviality. If

N = p*q, p < q prime

with b2k < N < b2k+1

then, in order that p and q have the same number of base-b digits, it is necessary that p >= bk. (The only possibility of equality is with k = 1 when the base b is prime.)

The only question that arises is whether the indicated number p1p2 is less than b2k+1. I believe this will be true for sufficiently large k.

I see no analogous argument for least brilliant greater than an odd power of the base, or for greatest brilliant number less than any power of the base.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-14, 13:59   #35
Alfred
 
Alfred's Avatar
 
May 2013
Germany

34 Posts
Default

Dr Sardonicus,

thank you for your explanation.
Alfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-01, 15:46   #36
Branger
 
Oct 2018

1516 Posts
Default

Continuing this work for 10^169-c, I have found that,

10^169-14319 =
2093963760229909907466815025292144577767961972509185032132596865267781491968551925027 *
4775631837535734107517020048684519409802862518997809812035307071144108182496827007803

I also attach proof files for some of the work I have done, for 10^n+-c for n = 167 and 169. Every number that has a factor larger than 1000 has that factor listed in the files. I'll post the files for n=165 shortly, I seem to have lost some ECM work that I'll redo first.

I intend to continue with n=171, but now I'm starting to get into the territory where the SNFS polynomials are getting rather large coefficients for the batch factorization approach and the relations I already have saved. I'm not sure if it would be quicker to sieve again for a new shared rational side, or if using the bad polynomials with the already existing relations is the least work, but for now I'm using what I have.
Attached Files
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_169plus.txt (59.0 KB, 43 views)
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_169minus.txt (32.3 KB, 47 views)
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_167plus.txt (14.4 KB, 38 views)
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_167minus.txt (92.3 KB, 38 views)
Branger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-01, 18:42   #37
Alfred
 
Alfred's Avatar
 
May 2013
Germany

34 Posts
Default

I think it is a good idea to share these informations.

Thank you.

So anyone who is interested in can doublecheck the

correctness of the statements easily.

Last fiddled with by Alfred on 2020-11-01 at 18:45
Alfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-02, 19:50   #38
Branger
 
Oct 2018

101012 Posts
Default

And finally here are the proof files for 10^165+-c.
Attached Files
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_165minus.txt (64.6 KB, 40 views)
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_165plus.txt (47.7 KB, 47 views)
Branger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-10, 04:04   #39
swishzzz
 
Jan 2012
Toronto, Canada

53 Posts
Default

I am reserving 10^199+c to find the smallest 200-digit number which splits into p100*p100. Likely to take at least a few months with an expected 160+ SNFS factorizations, thought I'd at least post here to prevent any potential duplicated efforts. If anyone is interested in crunching a few of these let me know, I can coordinate sieving efforts on another thread.
swishzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-13, 20:52   #40
Branger
 
Oct 2018

2110 Posts
Default

The next one was quicker and only required 27 SNFS factorizations.

10^171+7467 =

15982339170654488061693029140006521400812407348641102533477071444640746972955602480993 *
62569063847432371483112919249240694575724386807642240564815844097979821472243476190219

Continuing with 10^171-c.
Attached Files
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_171plus.txt (16.0 KB, 37 views)
Branger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-10, 09:06   #41
Branger
 
Oct 2018

3×7 Posts
Default

Another 60 SNFS factorizations revealed that

10^171-16569 =
10026073074372053022855343749617316836566548448825765741868691467529514155418582501607 *
99739947293634841017115301301296053264053136150611286806831026018776115664482913987233

Proof file is attached. The batch SNFS approach was still faster than regular SNFS but its getting close, I'll probably continue with 10^173 +- c
Attached Files
File Type: txt Brilliant_factored_171minus.txt (38.3 KB, 26 views)
Branger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Could a Distributed Computing approach help find the smallest Brier number? jasong Math 5 2007-05-29 13:30
10^119+x brilliant number Citrix Prime Sierpinski Project 12 2006-05-19 22:21
smallest number used in a mathematical proof? ixfd64 Lounge 22 2006-02-01 17:06
Can you find the smallest number? Fusion_power Puzzles 8 2003-11-18 19:36
Smallest untested number? wirthi Math 10 2003-10-05 13:02

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:49.

Thu Feb 25 05:49:59 UTC 2021 up 84 days, 2:01, 0 users, load averages: 2.68, 2.23, 2.31

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.