Possible 'Formula' for Wagstaff numbers - Page 2

2023-04-26, 23:24

#12

paulunderwood

Sep 2002

Database er0rr

4666₁₀ Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by kijinSeija

.

This is a valid test ?

Unless you show sufficiency for primality it remains a "valid" PRP test like many others. PRP tests become less likely to fail as Wq grows. What would be good and probably not possible is to find a test that is less that uses less than ~q multiplications mod Wq.

Page 2 of 2

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sophie Germain Primes, Mersenne numbers and Wagstaff numbers Connection	JCoveiro	Number Theory Discussion Group	2	2022-02-08 14:43
Universal seeds of the LLT for Mersenne and Wagstaff numbers	T.Rex	Math	22	2021-12-11 18:05
P-1 bounds calculation for Wagstaff numbers	axn	Software	10	2018-07-24 06:27
PRIMALITY PROOF for Wagstaff numbers!	AntonVrba	Math	96	2009-02-25 10:37
Bernoulli and Euler numbers (Sam Wagstaff project)	fivemack	Factoring	4	2008-02-24 00:39

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:57.

Sun May 28 03:57:18 UTC 2023 up 283 days, 1:25, 0 users, load averages: 0.61, 0.77, 0.88

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