20120229, 22:53  #1 
Aug 2002
8,311 Posts 
Mathematics of Cunningham Numbers (3rd ed., 2002, A.M.S.)
See attached file.
Last fiddled with by Batalov on 20120301 at 23:15 Reason: (the PDF has no dates; but see the curious reader can look up PDF properties! ...or look up AMS website) 
20120229, 23:20  #2 
Nov 2003
2^{2}×5×373 Posts 

20120229, 23:58  #3 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
3·1,657 Posts 
The book was published by the American Mathematical Society in 2002 and was available as free download. I also have a copy of it.

20120301, 02:15  #4 
Dec 2010
Ava, Missouri
2^{3}×5 Posts 
RDS,
You know that all mathematics books are available online?? free? I have 3.4 gigs of mathematics and engineering books in PDF format. Yeah, can you believe it? Someone took the time to put every single book in a massive collection for immediate download. Took me about 45 minutes to download all 3.4 gigs. Anyways, did you see what this book had to say about your ability to factor? Check this out: "The most difficult number Silverman has factored so far is the 87digit number (5^128 + 1)/514. At present, this is the largest number ever factored by a general purpose factoring algorithm, i.e., one which can factor all numbers of a given size in about the same time." Neo Last fiddled with by Neo on 20120301 at 02:40 Reason: Couldn't help myself 
20120301, 03:41  #5 
Romulan Interpreter
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand
263B_{16} Posts 
Who the hell selected that font?
I don't care how fast one can factor, and all is irrelevant in this context. I can factor faster and higher then most people here, not because I have the understanding of the math. I don't have it. But I am lucky to have better "hardware" then most people around. Does that make me a better mathematician? Or programmer? (none of the programs I use are written by me, except small script to put the programs to work).
And I also don't care who has the copyrights of some math book written years ago. All scientific books should be free after a while. But what I can say is that I hate the font (typeface) used. With digits up and down, not aligned with the baseline of the row, with 1 and 2 being smaller, when they follow after 7, 9, etc, you think they are powers... extremely difficult to read. Who the hell selected that font? 
20120301, 09:02  #6 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
31·191 Posts 
Page 43 mentions a primality test for 2^p+2^((p+1)/2)+1
Is it more than a N1 test combined with the cunningham tables? I am not aware of something better than that for this form. ___________ EDIT: Well, even easier than that: N1 has ~50% factored part  2^{(p1)/2}. No need to look up anything in the rest of the tables. See also the larger examples of these MG norms (found since then) Last fiddled with by Batalov on 20120301 at 23:37 Reason: inline A 
20120301, 10:54  #7  
Nov 2003
2^{2}·5·373 Posts 
Quote:
present it somewhere else. Quote:


20120301, 10:56  #8 
Nov 2003
2^{2}·5·373 Posts 

20120301, 11:52  #9 
Romulan Interpreter
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand
9,787 Posts 

20120301, 12:43  #10 
Tribal Bullet
Oct 2004
3543_{10} Posts 
That typeface is quite common in older books; I think the theory is that it's more pleasing to the eye to break up long runs of things that have the same size.
Also, Carlos is right and the copyright holders chose to make this book available for free download. Last fiddled with by jasonp on 20120301 at 12:44 
20120301, 12:50  #11 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
3·1,657 Posts 
I got the book because its free download link was published on NFS@Home homepage.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Factoring humongous Cunningham numbers  Yamato  Factoring  1834  20211005 18:22 
New phi for homogeneous Cunningham numbers  wpolly  Factoring  26  20160729 04:34 
Don't know how to work on Cunningham numbers.  jasong  GMPECM  6  20060630 08:51 
Doing Cunningham numbers but messed up.  jasong  Factoring  1  20060403 17:18 
Need help factoring Cunningham numbers  jasong  Factoring  27  20060321 02:47 