Go Back > Extra Stuff > Blogorrhea > storflyt32

Thread Tools
Old 2020-11-21, 13:15   #144
Feb 2013

1EB16 Posts

Or maybe just a new one here for not any refresh or only start.

Here that I could be adding both the P14 and P34 for just only the more it could be for added to the puzzle, for also the included it could be.

But next only so sad, in that I could conclude just for a meaning, that any excluding factors should be only left, for still only remaining, when that of RSA just here.

So here not any spelling of Truth for also making it, when also backwards for only a sentence, when still not any relevant Fact just for science here, when still only enumeration for that of counting.

Do I next make it any magic number here for only guessed or presumed, and still only the composite it could be, for not any factorized just here?

To be honest here, except still only for science, when just only meaning.

And next only blame such a thing on my fingers for not any mouth being shut, except also taking the blade from mouth for only the deaf ears it could be, when still not any completeness for nature, for also the science it could be.

So tell me that it could be just wrong here, for still only a relevant Fact, and also making it such a thing for only presence or behavior, when still not any appearance, for perhaps only a Revelation here instead.

But only sing a song for perhaps the precious or valuable it could be, and next also meant for the science it next only could be.

Here just knowing that contemplating could be still a thought which could be made, except also certain for only a conclusive meaning, when also that of absolutes.

But only thought of here, for still not any guessed, and only a Premise we could be making for nature, for not any relevant or certain Fact.

And here only just top of the hat it could be for not any specific, when still only guessing for a show, for not any relevance here instead.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2020-11-21 at 13:17
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-01, 08:07   #145
Feb 2013

491 Posts

Anyway or except, but getting a lot of opened tabs here for that of opened, or such a thing, and also reporting a couple of numbers with or at PrimeGrid.

C74 = 26941811119629528593305373922289106244557147635172804150567045597504963417

C83 = 30549712044281597772395605192292689494730887363710666477127645162346635385324839199

C96 = 236755196167511079419699759126557370025763669352258004657003126357150539538519582784837795777819

Here those three numbers for only being composite, and all could be hiding quite decent numbers, for just factors inside.

The problem is that they could be really small, except still needing ecm for that of testing, when only "borking" for just the standard method here instead.

Here I am getting two separate P36 factors at first, when also different from each other, but could be a C121 just remaining, for that of the end.

The problem here, namely do I know it already, and the factors became reported only separately, and here I perhaps do not know.

I get to a P20 for that of an intermediate result just here, except not knowing for only the answer it belongs, for that of result.

Remaining number becomes a C74, and here still not any completed, for only result.

Perhaps we better should know, but if just keying in the C74, it could be listed as only being composite.

I will need just editing that above, when also that of end result.

Anyway, or OK, for just testing the C96 with another number or factor just known, and it becomes "off the record".

The problem here is just "fiddle" for only just meant, except still only ecm here for just getting at it, and also a sense that it could be quite good factors.

Reporting it when having it just here, except only in bed just in the meantime, but again thinking it should be quite good or decent factors here.

Nam, nam, problem is that I could be having more good factors here just up the sleeves, for not any P36 versus P45 it should be either.

Not only just wait a minute for that of result, and also such a thing you could be waiting for when that of end game, or at least numbers.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2020-12-02 at 11:04
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 11:32   #146
Feb 2013

491 Posts

A little unsure, but perhaps I should start a new one just here.

The three mentioned numbers did not make it with ecm for that of 2^21 curves, so trying out with 2^22 curves instead.

But here those three numbers could become in-depth for that of analysis or result, and next also being quantifiable for that of an extract or pull, for only possible value or worth.

So, climb the Matterhorn once again, for the sleek and steep side it could be for that of slope, and next also vertical, for almost impossible, when just a thing to do.

We know that 10^10000 makes for an even number, and next also divisible by 2, or 5.

Therefore, the number being mentioned earlier on or previously, should not be any factorizable at all, for only just reported, except only becoming loose factors for that of result.

So, do you make it only nature for a resemblance when also a pick, or should be only a comparison just here, for only the measure or measurement it perhaps could be?

Could give it a try, but here knowing it could be a SIQS, for that of possible months for only taking, for also the bit of wait it could be.

And better now, for any late, because it could be just off for that of leaving, for not any staying.

Again, for only the mentioned number for perhaps the better, and should not be any Lie for only telling, for only such a thing it perhaps could be.

Only that it becomes around the corner for that of twisted mentality, and here should not be any such thing for only wished for or desired either.

But here I had a wait, for also pause, and forgot reporting the factors I perhaps could have, except only my stupidity for making it loose factors, for only close together.

Here we make it so that the Magic number, for only RSA-1024, could be the end factors for only left, when also remaining, when still not any reported.

Therefore, also excluding factors, for not any included it could be here at all.

I just had it in one ear for only a whisper, except not any Second chance for only a brute force Algorithm instead, when we could be getting at a result for only a making, for also meant to be.

Problem here is that science (for not any numbers) could only be that of making for only a result, except still not any meaning for only such a thing it could be.

But here we know that at least it could be an Implication for just only telling, except not tell me the same, for still only the story it perhaps could be.

Here we see or make it that of an Implication for only a Consequence, when still only the other project, for that of nature, for not any Logical Fallacy or infallibility it could be for the subject of Religion here instead.

But here still only making it infinity for that of a Concept or Construct, when also that of nature "in full", for only that of a Consequence, or perhaps result or Event for just only happening.

You know that it could be just brutal and hard, for also the nice feather it could be for only a soft touch, when also gentle, but here still only nature for a meaning, when also presence.

But here that of "reveal yourself", for only the return it perhaps could be, also could be a recognition for that of Religion for only forbidden subject, when still not any nature here instead, for only a couple of numbers.

Again, only the world is a stage, for next only what it could be all about.

Anyway, or OK, but the server could be just ahead of me for that of precedence, when only just knowing the possible factors I could be reporting.

Sorry to say, for only just rich man for not any poor, because here that of greed for that of greediness, for not any hard to swallow instead.

Next only my day for not any night for only given preference, and next I could be choosing for just only a giving, except not any nature meant for only a Cause.

The problem here is that nature could end up being inconclusive or undeterminate for that of a reason, when also a Contradiction or Ambiguity for just the same.

But also Uncertainties here of course, and makes us still not any able to determine for possible result or outcome it perhaps could be.

Some people could think that it could be a Reason for only just meant, except that inconclusiveness should be part of nature here instead.

But here also missing lines could become that of slipping for just not any throat it perhaps should not be either.

Only that you know that nature should be that of "both" for just meaning, for only the Contradictions or Ambiguity it perhaps could be.

Any science for just a thought, when also meaning, and perhaps also numbers, except not any slipping, for only making it a forbidden subject instead.

Here with the other project, I could be making it a Reason for that of meaning, when also a Creator for the same, being the possible fundament of nature for only rooted on a Principle,
for only the possible meaning it perhaps could be.

So, just give me everything, for only a chance, and perhaps you did not like it either, for only the result it perhaps could be, or ending up being.

Always that of numbers, of course, and I could be editing that, for perhaps later on.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2020-12-02 at 13:05
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-05, 19:47   #147
Feb 2013

491 Posts

Problem is that if I make it one for the other, I could end up with a new factor or prime here instead.

And this from still only the small one I am trying to factorize here, of course, except only a new number each time.

We got it here for just concluding, in that it should be excluding factors here, for that of remaining, for still only left.

Therefore also flipping around on each side, except perhaps not knowing the starting point, except only the original number where it once came from.

And because of that, a couple of new factors here, except still only unfinished business, for not being factorable at the other end.

The only thing I know, is for where it is still not any reported, because here only incomplete for that of such a thing.

And for that, also factorizing down into a multiplication of numbers I already could have.


And for only good morning, still not any good night it should be here either, for just only saying farewell.

Should tell that I did a bit of factoring in the meantime, and one such for that of task, ran for quite a while for also the good factor it could be.

Let us see, for not any waiting it should be either, and next only pick one such up, for that of an example.

That is for not getting it any wrong, but let us see, for still only the thing of the rest.

Oh, so not any jablon or template for just only writing (dangit), but guess it could be taking a long time for that of running here instead.

Should tell that I let it run for a quite or very long time here, for that of, or in order to get or make it such a factor.

Therefore at least such a number worth for only what it could be, for not any "crucial" here instead, or perhaps validness.

Or perhaps a better one here instead, for just only meant when that of a factor, because here still only meant.

Edit: If you pick the P44 for only just a chance here, it most likely would factorize into something else, because of only worth for that of meaning.

Really, that it is a quite good one here, perhaps, or so I could think.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2020-12-18 at 04:53
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-29, 07:03   #148
Feb 2013

1111010112 Posts

Hi gents or gentiles, or perhaps ladies, for only the project it could be here for just gentle, and next I said thank you for only such a thing.

Next should tell that two or perhaps three of my factorizations blew, for only the long or "insane" running times it could be for that of such a thing.

Next, of course you could be making it that of excluded, for not any included, for only just knowing for the thing we could perhaps have, for also make.

Because of that, not making it any factors for only just links, when only sitting here for that of being drunk, for only the beer here instead.

But if the factorization I could make for that of excluded, also the extract it could be, for also the thing not any more, for just only the included it could be.

Here I make it so that a factorization should be only for the better, when also the part it could be, for not any "trip-trap", for only result instead.

Just following a line, and you also could be following a sequence, for not any "eventuality" or result it could be, for only that of RSA-1024 popping up in front of your eyes.

Only just two, for not any three, and next not any more we could be doing for such a thing, only because it could be popping up for that of a result.

Next only writing for just in the blind, should also tell, or perhaps more later.

OK, or anyway, for just only the factor it became, for also large when that of being reported, only one for that of a sequence, when perhaps only making it.

Therefore, should be many here instead, and next do not ask about any silliness, for only such a thing being reported.

Here I perhaps should think that just one factor I could get, also the one more I also could exclude, in the same way or similar context.

Just many for that of a start, and next you of course could be excluding a couple of factors it could be, for also the numbers it could be, (or that of such).

Again clean, but could be trying to report what I have, for not any Lie or Falsification here instead.

Here the RSA algorithm could be telling that it should be excluded for only result, for not any tax exemption here (of course).

Trying to report in due time, but here it became only the beer for also hot or warm room for only that of an option, so more to come.

Again, should also try making it the links just here, for that of the same, and getting back at it,

But again, for only the important it could be, and next I could choose to factorize a couple of numbers, or perhaps only two, for the answer I could meke or get,
and next of course loose factors only for such.

The point here is that you are only able to exclude a couple of factors for not any rest or remaining here instead, because here only continuing on that of the subject.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2020-12-29 at 11:45
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-06, 21:10   #149
Feb 2013

1EB16 Posts

Hi ho, let us continue, for not any better people just around, for also the project it could be.

The problem is that I left the computer with some unanswered questions left, and rather I thought it became maybe a dozen or two composite factors, for that of remaining.

But next that of remaining, for still only remaining, or should I give my hand on just that, for only the 4480 curves it could be, and next breaking in the middle?

Here we only factorize a couple of numbers, for that of excluding for the rest, in that it perhaps could be the numbers we want.

But if you know that it became this one for also that one, next the puzzle it could be for that of together, and next you make it all for that of being included.

So, pull it for only an extract, and next I also was so brave for only reporting it, except only one pair for still only the needle in the haystack it could be.

Answer for meaning, namely that you could factorize a number until or within a limit, and next not any more, for only the hardship or complexity it could be.

Example here, namely breaking at 2215/4480 for not any simple or easy at all.

Either it could be Matterhorn for that of climbing for its simple or complex part, or it could be different sides for that of simple versus hard instead.

Problem here is that I could be getting at the simpler or simplest part of a factor just for meaning, except not any all, for that of completeness, or "through" instead.

If I know that a P215 could divide C617, always my curious interest, for not any remainder of a number it should be instead.

This of course makes it uneven for that of distributed, and next also the number getting at for that of being first.

But if a RSA number could be any even just instead, next also the "hooked" or hooked on it could be, for that of getting a number here at all.

You see, but I could be sieving for just only the better numbers it could be, except only climbing Matterhorn for the shallow side, and not any steep or vertical here instead.

The one I perhaps reported, should not be any invalid for just only fake either, but only one in the crowd, for perhaps only RSA-1024 or RSA-2048 meant.

Next, I almost forgot that I could be sieving both 2 and 3 for only the answer I could get, for also the better it could be.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2021-01-06 at 21:15
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-16, 01:53   #150
Feb 2013

491 Posts

Nice for only adding it here, because only one part for the puzzle I perhaps could make it.

So when you think that there could be numbers within, also factors therein, for just the same.

But next only asking for more, except only splitting numbers for that of dividing, and next also the answer, or "resolution", you could be making for the same.

Is any RSA-1024 for also Magic number, just the 2 divided by something, for not any number here instead?

What if for some reason it became only continuing, for that of an endless journey, and next you were almost there for only an answer it could be`

So, pretty for also beautiful, and next she could be standing out a little for only showing herself, except also the separate factors it could be for only an individual meaning.

When we add to a scheme, also that of factoring, except also a result for that of a meaning, for just only thought.

Those numbers we could get, should be still in between for that of separate, except also part of the obvious number for which we could be still asking a question for.

So, "Divide and conquer" perhaps, and I ended up on a number for that of a separate, except more a specific sequence here instead.

Not more, for just only the end for that of now, like a C112 perhaps, and I could be flipping around, for that of starting all over, for only the Magic number as a starting point.

Those numbers which perhaps could constitute or mean RSA-1024, should not be any 2 for just only factor either, and next also that sequence.

Is that perhaps a "lump" for only just heavy, or did I not do that, for only such a thing it could be?

Either or, for also nevertheless, I could be getting at the answer for just around, by means of both sides for just only the number it could be.

If I knew that just 5 could be only a factor, next fine, except also 6 for only 2*3, and next flip around, for still only the opposite it could be, for that of meaning.

Here should tell, or need to be checking, except that the word "congruence" is getting at ne just here, for only an angle of approach, when it perhaps could be both.

Rather that we choose to factorize the individual parts of the number, for only separate, except also respective it should be for that of such.

So here I know for only being visible, and next also discern for that of its part, when also obvious or evident.

Next only sorry about that, for only the mixed feelings it could be, except also a conglomerate for that of number for that of a mix or blend.

Take (2^48853-1) for just only an example, and we know it should be such a number for only that of meaning, except not any RSA.

So, take the needle for just only let it wander, for not any cloth, and next only undecisiveness for such, for also "you never do not know".

We do have a couple of such numbers, starting with a C147 for that of 7529... at the start, except also not concluded for the meaning it could be.

So here you perhaps know that it could be someone here in the past, telling me that he could factorize this number, except only knowing, from the inherited complexity it could be.

Guess you know it "aint any work", for also the lyrics behind it, and it makes you almost upset.

Are the remainders for that of numbers a possible scheme, or should I perhaps be telling or revealing it for only the scheme it could be?

Next, I left it out, for not any forgotten, but rather it could be the factors I could make, for only part of it instead.

So, believe in Santa Claus for only making it, and only numbers instead, for only the probable or actual it perhaps might be.

Only one part versus the other for only a saga, and next only such a thing, for still not anything lacking, for only the complete it could be.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2021-01-16 at 01:56
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-16, 02:21   #151
Feb 2013

49110 Posts

But again that if you know that it could be a single meaning for that of result, also I could extract or pull a little.

So next thinking, and we could be making it parts for that of numbers just here, for only how it could subdivide.

Laughter in the audience, but I could perhaps augment for only the part it is, except also a RSA number for that of being separate.

So try me, and I could perhaps be excluding 2 for only starters, for not any P12 here instead.

One thing getting at me is that it should be mutual for only just common, except only separate for that of diverse instead.

So, if you did not know it, I could also be lost here, for not any distinct part I could be making it instead.

True believer perhaps, for only being drunk, and next I could only conclude for that of science when that of Certainty, for not any "certified" instead.

Bring me the shuttle for next also hold my hand, because next such a thing could also be held for that of a hand.

Or you could be proving science for only the respective it could be, of course.

Should it be any fixed, for also firm, for also mentioned with another project, for not any stubborn it perhaps could be either?

You make it nature for an option perhaps, but next perhaps not any lazy either, only because it could be even.

Just explainable, and it becomes obvious Fact, for still only the single or tantamount it could be, except also unique or unambiguous as well, for only an example.

So, who told me it should be any paramount, for me only translating such a thing instead.

Could I perhaps tell, for only a phrase, that nature should be perfect or complete by only Principle, and next also you knowing that, for only the thing it could be?

Makes me kind of a sailor, for only sail at sea, for only the knowledge I perhaps could get or attain, for only the nature it should be all about.

So, complete or completeness versus the other thing for just only asking, and still only meant, except still only nature for just only Principle, or being being derived.

Should you still only try me, and next not any "simplistic" for word either, so next it only becomes.

Any sarcasm could be just for only a sting, and next not any meant just either, so back tomorrow, for only more that of Idiosyncracy.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2021-01-16 at 02:38
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-30, 02:32   #152
Feb 2013

491 Posts

C103 = 4115900951511518606651280388582813439554940959126983231936627776605570244920783953656643755113654015577

Be warned, because this number could be having quite good factors preceding it, so here an end number, for just only the difficult it could be.

If you are having the time for just willing or sporty, you could give this number a try, because here thinking it should be only just two factors, for that of result.

This because I have not added the factors preceding it right now, for only an option between a stuck hand for also room, which needs to be cleaned.

The other thing is that it became a couple of factors adding to my disk or hard drive for only that of "en masse", except also the discussion at PrimeGrid,
for not any Genefer factors or primes we could have.

As you know, I stopped noting down the Mersenne primes past or beyond M23 only for that of the size it could take, except only M48 instead.

But also that WinPFGW or the like, for the chosen application, could burn my computer, for not any result obtainable or just at hand for only readily.

Here I am doing my business at PrimeGrid instead, unfortunately, and next both ESP and Cullen, for also GCW LLR at the other partition.

But here also the latter not any welcome, for still perhaps successful, and here only having Silver for that of a badge, when also difficulty for that of task.

Here I guess it could become a sub-dividing of sorts, when that of such a thing for only numbers, except that it could perhaps be both -1 and +1 here.

We know that it could be just a Mersenne prime here, because it redirects for that of making it number instead.

So here still GCW LLR for just only difficulty, when also implicit or "intrinsic" for that of such a thing, when only knowing that it could be difficult for that of running, except also 2^p-1, and please have me corrected.

Is that of free will for only that of ease, or could it be that of simplicity instead, when only picking such a number on the spot for that of running?

Here we know that Mersenne is still ahead of just anything else or other for only that of number for only size, when making it the largest known prime just here.

So here PrimeGrid is only thorough, for not any casual, for only digging its way for only doing, when that of making it both ESP, Cullen, and CW LLR for that of running.

Just a silly thought, for only "pick a chance just on me", and next not any easy for just only running, when that of a Mersenne prime it becomes, for only that of a selection of numbers.

Could I be still only determined, for only choosing to do it my way for only just knowing, except not any Mersenne prime found for only a chance for such, when that of luck?

But if the scheme could just be telling that a Mersenne prime "always" could be ahead of any Genefer number for only prime, next also following the crowd, for only that of playing.

If you rather question "how likely" for just only often, still only 50 or so Mersenne primes found, for not any determinstic or opportunistic instead, except only readily given by hand.

Why could it be so, and next only asking, for also the other project it could be, when still a difference between that of above for not any sequence here instead.

Regards, finnenummer, userid 12041, at PrimeGrid, as well as also "walkingatsleep", userid 170706

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2021-01-30 at 03:01
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-02-19, 13:13   #153
Feb 2013

1EB16 Posts

C74 = 23969402017465753088871895271311493200483479824237386162968782610229281643

I did not check with the Factor database here at first, when only becoming the culprit for the possible factorization I could make, and next also be having the answer.

But if the original intention was for only numbers which could not any break, it could end up becoming the open question for only doing such a thing here instead, for next only able to do so.

This number could be only an end factor for that of being composite, and next you flip in the ordinary or usual way for only making it versus here instead, for only the opposite.

I made it just a huge one here earlier on, and for next flipping around, only encountering the same difficulty for only how long time it could take.

But as I said for only making it, we could be on the edge here now for only doing such a thing for only being possible, next only for the time it still could only take.

We make it a secret here for only the reason that it could contain hidden messages for not any encrypted at all, but only open for that a scheme when that of numbers here instead.

So here I am only sad to seeing you go, except also a secret for only broken, when it became only the hidden message for such a thing.

The number in question should perhaps relate only with RSA-1024 here for only given purposes or meaning, for still not any RSA-2048, for only the designated purpose it could be.

Please show me the way for only referring me to a discussion here about Cryptography, because here it should not be any such thing for only meaning or understanding, for only the incomprehensible or garbled mess it could be instead.

So always for that of the expected, and also it could be the unexpected, for not any anticipating such a thing for only the Event it perhaps could be.

Dances on roses and perhaps true, except that I only gave you the answer here instead.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2021-02-19 at 13:16
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-04-01, 06:19   #154
Feb 2013

491 Posts

I was not logged on for a year because of problems at home.

Read the other discussion about this if you happen to know about it.

Here expecting a little better for not that large size number, but here quite even factors.

Try it yourself, because this is not working on a laptop computer.

Checking in later for perhaps adding it here to the Factor Database.

But also it became that of spacing between the lines again, needing a delete of half the lines.

Trying Go Advanced in Edit mode, but here not knowing if this becomes the current setting, except still editing.

Nice and perhaps not needed above, but I am not so concerned about the listed cofactors here,
but rather that it is not supposed to "divide" from a larger RSA number either.

Perhaps should have been mentioned first, but only noticing that it should be easier having a small piece of the cake,
rather than the one still left in the desk.

If I choose to do so using either a 309 or 617 digit number, it fails for that of getting the wrong number as a result,
making for only small factors, and not the one being wished for.

Except that it should be still a Secret, it becomes the other way of getting at it for only being more cumbersome.

Also that the C97 made it to the factors using SIQS here instead, using the laptop.

Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2022-04-01 at 09:38
storflyt32 is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Previous Miss? R.D. Silverman GMP-ECM 4 2009-11-14 19:57
Using long long's in Mingw with 32-bit Windows XP grandpascorpion Programming 7 2009-10-04 12:13
I think it's gonna be a long, long time panic Hardware 9 2009-09-11 05:11
UPDATED: The current pre-sieved range reservation thread and stats page gribozavr Twin Prime Search 10 2007-01-19 21:06
Ram allocation (in Re: previous thread) JuanTutors Marin's Mersenne-aries 1 2004-08-29 17:23

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:37.

Tue Jan 31 04:37:11 UTC 2023 up 166 days, 2:05, 0 users, load averages: 0.63, 0.91, 0.91

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