mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2019-01-12, 01:09   #265
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

2·1,291 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Looking at the current status of the exponent 8191, one other prime factor is known, and the remaining cofactor is a PRP.
Uh... it's not.
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 01:21   #266
philmoore
 
philmoore's Avatar
 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.

2×13×43 Posts
Default

I found the larger of the two known prime factors of M8191 in 2003 and did the computations at the time to show that the cofactor was not only composite, but was also not a power of a single prime factor, so we know that the cofactor has at least two distinct prime factors. Currently, the ECM status shows that it probably has no other factors less than around 50 digits.
philmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 02:43   #267
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

8,963 Posts
Default

We know that. We watched you at the time , and we also did a lot of work on those DM's in 2012-2014 or so, with the mmff fever, but stopped for a while. That mother is composite. But from the amount of work done on it, no new factor under (about) 45 digits should exits.

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2019-01-12 at 02:44
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 03:05   #268
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

1010000101102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philmoore View Post
I found the larger of the two known prime factors of M8191 in 2003 and did the computations at the time to show that the cofactor was not only composite, but was also not a power of a single prime factor, so we know that the cofactor has at least two distinct prime factors.
If we ever find a non-squarefree Mersenne number (with prime exponent), it would make headlines. The factor in question would be the third known Wieferich prime.

I run a script to check for this every few days. Takes a fraction of a second. Very tiny effort, very huge payoff, astronomical odds.
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 13:24   #269
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

32×433 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP2 View Post
Uh... it's not.
Sorry about that. When I read "PRP Cofactor" in the "Status" column I thought it meant the cofactor was a PRP. Apparently it means "results of PRP test on cofactor" or some such.

Last fiddled with by Dr Sardonicus on 2019-01-12 at 13:28
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 13:53   #270
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

A1616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus View Post
Sorry about that. When I read "PRP Cofactor" in the "Status" column I thought it meant the cofactor was a PRP. Apparently it means "results of PRP test on cofactor" or some such.
You're not the first one to be confused by that.

It really should be changed from "PRP Cofactor" to "Cofactor PRP test".

And then for consistency, "LL" to "LL test", "PRP" to "PRP test", "P-1" to "P−1 test".
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-01-12, 17:43   #271
JeppeSN
 
JeppeSN's Avatar
 
"Jeppe"
Jan 2016
Denmark

2·34 Posts
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP2 View Post
Never mind larger examples, there's no smaller example.

The only other p=2^k+k which is a Mersenne prime exponent is k=1, p=3, but then W(k) = 1.
Not sure I know what you mean. With k=1 you are describing the smaller example. It gives \(2^k+k = 3\) and \(2^k=2\) and the prime (seven) is \[M(3)=2^3-1=2\cdot 2^2 - 1=W(2)\]
The other example k=9 written the same way, since \(2^k+k = 521\) and \(2^k=512\), is \[M(521)=2^{521}-1=512\cdot 2^{512} - 1=W(512)\]

For the fun of it, we can merge the lists of Mersennes and Woodalls like this:

Code:
   M(2)
   M(3) = W(2)
          W(3)
   M(5)
   M(7)
          W(6)
  M(13)
  M(17)
  M(19)
  M(31)
          W(30)
  M(61)
          W(75)
          W(81)
  M(89)
 M(107)
          W(115)
 M(127)
          W(123)
          W(249)
          W(362)
          W(384)
          W(462)
 M(521) = W(512)
 M(607)
          W(751)
          W(822)
M(1279)
M(2203)
M(2281)
M(3217)
M(4253)
M(4423)
          W(5312)
      .   .
      .   .
      .   .

Last fiddled with by JeppeSN on 2019-01-12 at 18:42 Reason: adding W(512) for comparison
JeppeSN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lucky ECM results mnd9 Data 1 2020-02-04 02:32
Fun with the Lucky Numbers of Euler ewmayer Probability & Probabilistic Number Theory 0 2015-10-18 01:37
Extremely lucky assignments apocalypse GPU to 72 6 2015-04-07 04:41
Lucky ECM hit Dubslow Factoring 3 2014-10-19 19:10
Lucky gmp-ecm curve... WraithX GMP-ECM 4 2009-01-12 16:29

All times are UTC. The time now is 23:38.

Fri Dec 4 23:38:04 UTC 2020 up 1 day, 19:49, 0 users, load averages: 1.32, 1.43, 1.46

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.