mersenneforum.org GIMPS: much worse odds than the lottery?
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2010-04-21, 17:29 #1 Unregistered   472 Posts GIMPS: much worse odds than the lottery? The odds of getting 5 out of 5 on the Mega millions lottery is 1 in 56*55*54*53*52/(5*4*3*2*1) = 1 in 3,819,816. The prize is $250,000, and a lot more if you can somehow get the mega number right. As most of you know, one dollar buys one ticket. The odds that a 100 million digit mersenne candidate factored to 76 bits will be prime is 1 in 2,556,600 (using the formula (how_far_factored-1) / (exponent times Euler's constant). A good computer will take a year and a half to test one 100,000,000 digit number, and the prize is$150,000. A year and a half is 13,140 hours, and most computers use ~50 watts more when they're busy compared to when they're idle. That comes out to 657 kilowatt-hours, so it'll cost you $72 to test one number, assuming you're charged at the U.S. average of 11 cents per kilowatt hour. So if you spend$72 on GIMPS, your odds of winning $150,000 are 1 in 2,556,600. But if you were to spend that same amount of money on the lottery, your chances of winning$250,000 or more are 53,053. Do these numbers look right?
 2010-04-21, 19:15 #2 S485122     Sep 2006 Brussels, Belgium 110011011112 Posts Your numbers minimise the cost of running GIMPS, you have to buy the computer, electricity costs are much higher in some places of the world... If you are in it to make money, you have a better thing to do : just save your money and do not participate in GIMPS and do not play the lottery. (The lottery is a bad investment as well : to be sure to earn 250 000 USD you have to spend 3 819 816 USD.) Gimps is not about the EFF prise, it can add to the excitement, but it is about something else. Jacob Last fiddled with by S485122 on 2010-04-21 at 19:19
2010-04-21, 19:34   #3
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101Γ103 Posts

3·5·613 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by S485122 (The lottery is a bad investment as well
That is blatantly false. It is not a bad investment. It is a voluntary tax on those that are bad at math.

2010-04-21, 19:47   #4
xilman
Bamboozled!

"πΊππ·π·π­"
May 2003
Down not across

290716 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly That is blatantly false. It is not a bad investment. It is a voluntary tax on those that are bad at math.
A beautiful characteristic of the UK lottery is that it is a popular voluntary tax on the statistically challenged.

Paul

2010-04-21, 19:48   #5
xilman
Bamboozled!

"πΊππ·π·π­"
May 2003
Down not across

1050310 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly That is blatantly false. It is not a bad investment. It is a voluntary tax on those that are bad at math.
As I observed earlier, many in North America don't do irony.

Paul

2010-04-21, 19:58   #6
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted

"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

17×251 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Unregistered ... and the prize is $150,000. http://www.mersenne.org/legal/#awards If you use Prime95/mprime and/or participate in GIMPS, you have to adhere to the above rules. You'd only get$50,000 of it.
Also, from those rules, if you find a prime below 100M digits, GIMPS will award you $3,000 (may change from$1,000 to \$5,000). Feel free to use that to try to find the odds of making up for the electricity by finding a smaller prime.

The lottery, on average, doesn't return anything like what is put into it.
The 10M digit prime award was an even worse average return.
The 100M digit prime award is even worse than the 10M digit award, as you've discovered.

Besides that, there are some inaccuracies, such as ignoring the cost of a computer, the total power cost (instead of just the "extra" cost of running Prime95 vs idle), AC costs, etc. (all of which play a more and more serious role if you decide to buy multiple computers for this task)

Last fiddled with by Mini-Geek on 2010-04-21 at 20:07

2010-04-21, 20:28   #7
joblack

Oct 2008
n00bville

52×29 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by xilman A beautiful characteristic of the UK lottery is that it is a popular voluntary tax on the statistically challenged. Paul
Not right. I know the odds (so does a lot of my friends) and we still play lottery (Euro Millions).

Beside having this discussion again ;) ... to marry is IMHO a far worse investment and I gladly invest a minimum amount in the lottery instead of drinking and smoking or having a female financial black hole (=wife) at home (like many of my colleges).

By the way my prime95 shows a chance of 1 to 250.000 for finding a 100m prime (with one worker thread).

Last fiddled with by joblack on 2010-04-21 at 20:31

2010-04-21, 22:28   #8

"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

22·3·641 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly That is blatantly false. It is not a bad investment. It is a voluntary tax on those that are bad at math.
There is another set of lottery fans who understand the odds, but do it for entertainment, for the thrill of imagining what it would be like to win, or something like that.

joblack and his friends may be in that group. I used to be married to someone in that group.

After all, once you've seen a movie for which you bought a ticket, you don't have the money you spent, but you have memories of the movie. Some folks really, really like getting a thrill, such as roller-coaster fans. Once they've had their roller-coaster ride, what do they have for their money? Lower odds than any lottery at those two events (though I did get a refund once when a theater movie projector failed).

... and also there are just plain gamblers.

All of the above may be quite knowledgeable about the math.

2010-04-21, 22:52   #9
joblack

Oct 2008
n00bville

52×29 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by cheesehead There is another set of lottery fans who understand the odds, but do it for entertainment, for the thrill of imagining what it would be like to win, or something like that. joblack and his friends may be in that group. I used to be married to someone in that group. After all, once you've seen a movie for which you bought a ticket, you don't have the money you spent, but you have memories of the movie. Some folks really, really like getting a thrill, such as roller-coaster fans. Once they've had their roller-coaster ride, what do they have for their money? Lower odds than any lottery at those two events (though I did get a refund once when a theater movie projector failed). ... and also there are just plain gamblers. All of the above may be quite knowledgeable about the math.
You're right - I'm a gambler - but in a calculated way. I don't play extensive lottery but for the minimal chance to win. I also used to play Hold'em Poker.

I suspect that more than half of the prime hunters aren't doing it just for 'scientific advances' but for the thrill to personally find a prime number (and to be immortal as a Mersenne prime number discoverer).

At least that's part of my motivation ...

Last fiddled with by joblack on 2010-04-21 at 22:56

2010-04-25, 09:43   #10
Freightyard

Nov 2008
San Luis Obispo CA

27 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Unregistered That comes out to 657 kilowatt-hours...to test one number
Does GIMPS cause global warming? Perhaps it should be banned. I'm calling Al Gore.

2010-04-25, 10:24   #11
lfm

Jul 2006
Calgary

52·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Freightyard Does GIMPS cause global warming? Perhaps it should be banned. I'm calling Al Gore.
We are very efficiently using the energy to find mersenne numbers. No other mersenne search has ever been as efficient.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post schickel Probability & Probabilistic Number Theory 36 2019-05-09 05:15 davar55 Lounge 8 2014-12-22 17:07 Flatlander Science & Technology 104 2010-10-26 16:28 Oddball Lounge 2 2010-05-06 02:18 TTn Soap Box 8 2005-10-27 09:55

All times are UTC. The time now is 13:29.

Wed Jan 20 13:29:36 UTC 2021 up 48 days, 9:40, 0 users, load averages: 5.16, 5.17, 5.10