mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-11-23, 23:04   #683
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

22·3·7·43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdH View Post
. . .
I will do even more study and post something extra later. . .
I reran the above using only 24 and came up with 70 unbroken and 296 broken. This shouldn't be too far off. Some variations may not be considered, but the runs still appear to break much more often than not.

Perhaps I should look at other drivers/guides?

I can't seem to find the page which describes the difference between drivers and guides. Is it still available somewhere?
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-23, 23:34   #684
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

110768 Posts
Default

Squaring the 31 is the manner in which one breaks 2^4 * 31.
Other powers of 2 would not be a driver; only the perfect number 496 = 2^4 * 31 is a driver.
I believe the same is true for the other perfect numbers: Square the 3 or 7 or 127 to escape.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-24, 05:02   #685
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

100100001100002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
I believe the same is true for the other perfect numbers: Square the 3 or 7 or 127 to escape.
Yep. There is a thread discussing the math, somewhere here around.
LaurV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-25, 04:49   #686
richs
 
richs's Avatar
 
"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California

17·71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richs View Post
439^40 is now at i554 (added 515 lines) and a C122 level with a 2^2 * 5 * 7 driver, so I will drop this reservation. The remaining C116 term is well ecm'ed and is ready for nfs.

Taking 439^42 at i15 and 439^44 at i2.
439^42 is now at i65 (added 50 lines) and a C131 level with a 2^3 * 3 * 5 driver so I will drop this reservation. The remaining C126 term is well ecm'ed and is ready for GNFS.

Continuing with 439^44.
richs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-11-29, 10:50   #687
garambois
 
garambois's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

3×149 Posts
Default

Page updated.
Many thanks to all for your help !
garambois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-06, 15:03   #688
unconnected
 
unconnected's Avatar
 
May 2009
Russia, Moscow

9E816 Posts
Default

I'm done with base 79 - all sequences in the table are >120 digits with >110 ECM-ed composites. Also I did some work with odd k's above the limit, will post results later.
unconnected is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-06, 15:50   #689
garambois
 
garambois's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

1101111112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unconnected View Post
I'm done with base 79 - all sequences in the table are >120 digits with >110 ECM-ed composites.
OK, I will make the next update in one or two weeks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by unconnected View Post
Also I did some work with odd k's above the limit, will post results later.
All right, keep me posted. I can always extend the base by adding more exponents.


Many thanks !
garambois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-13, 12:13   #690
RichD
 
RichD's Avatar
 
Sep 2008
Kansas

2·1,637 Posts
Default

One of the next logical tables would be 242 (2 * 11^2). I've taken it to i=52.

Edit: Updates to tables 29, 220, 284.

Last fiddled with by RichD on 2020-12-13 at 12:16
RichD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-13, 15:02   #691
garambois
 
garambois's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

3·149 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichD View Post
One of the next logical tables would be 242 (2 * 11^2). I've taken it to i=52.

Edit: Updates to tables 29, 220, 284.

I will update all the bases on the weekend of December 20th.
And I will also add the base 242 that you calculated.
Thus, the base 200 = 2 * 10^2 will be missing, if you like the bases for which the calculations end for all the exponents. These bases will be interesting for future analyses.
garambois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-13, 17:43   #692
RichD
 
RichD's Avatar
 
Sep 2008
Kansas

2×1,637 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garambois View Post
Thus, the base 200 = 2 * 10^2 will be missing, if you like the bases for which the calculations end for all the exponents. These bases will be interesting for future analyses.
I'm on it.
RichD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-13, 17:52   #693
garambois
 
garambois's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

6778 Posts
Default

OK, many thanks for your help !
garambois is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Broken aliquot sequences fivemack FactorDB 46 2021-02-21 10:46
Broken aliquot sequences schickel FactorDB 18 2013-06-12 16:09
A new theorem about aliquot sequences garambois Aliquot Sequences 34 2012-06-10 21:53
poaching aliquot sequences... Andi47 FactorDB 21 2011-12-29 21:11
New article on aliquot sequences schickel mersennewiki 0 2008-12-30 07:07

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:24.

Thu Feb 25 05:24:49 UTC 2021 up 84 days, 1:36, 0 users, load averages: 2.51, 2.82, 2.85

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.