mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Miscellaneous Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2019-04-02, 13:36   #1
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

608310 Posts
Default 33 = (8,866,128,975,287,528)³ + (-8,778,405,442,862,239)³ + (-2,736,111,468,807,040)³

Bristol mathematician cracks Diophantine puzzle

33 = (8,866,128,975,287,528)³ + (-8,778,405,442,862,239)³ + (-2,736,111,468,807,040)³
Quote:
The next and final unsolved number under 100 – 42 – has the appeal of being Douglas Adams' answer to the meaning of life. Dr. Booker is currently working with Andrew Sutherland from MIT to find it.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 14:43   #2
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

2·2,909 Posts
Default

The relevant numberphile video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASoz_NuIvP0
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 15:23   #3
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

7×11×79 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
The relevant numberphile video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASoz_NuIvP0
That guy is really cool.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 15:31   #4
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

64538 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
That guy is really cool.
He's also on this forum - Congrats arbooker! Looking forward to seeing 42 cracked
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 16:43   #5
Nick
 
Nick's Avatar
 
Dec 2012
The Netherlands

3·541 Posts
Default

Details: https://people.maths.bris.ac.uk/~maa...456.1554223010
Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 21:34   #6
Stargate38
 
Stargate38's Avatar
 
"Daniel Jackson"
May 2011
14285714285714285714

3·5·43 Posts
Default

If anyone wants to know, here are the factorizations:

8866128975287528=2^3*7*467*378289*896201
8778405442862239=8778405442862239
2736111468807040=2^7*5*89917*47545783
Stargate38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-04-02, 22:29   #7
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

933210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stargate38 View Post
If anyone wants to know, here are the factorizations:

8866128975287528=2^3*7*467*378289*896201
8778405442862239=8778405442862239
2736111468807040=2^7*5*89917*47545783
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-06, 17:22   #8
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

7·11·79 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
He's also on this forum - Congrats arbooker! Looking forward to seeing 42 cracked
Quote:
Professors Booker and Sutherland's solution for 42 would be found by using Charity Engine; a 'worldwide computer' that harnesses idle, unused computing power from over 500,000 home PCs to create a crowd-sourced, super-green platform made entirely from otherwise wasted capacity.

The answer, which took over a million hours of calculating to prove
42 = (-80538738812075974)³ + (80435758145817515)³ + (12602123297335631)³
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-06, 23:14   #9
rudy235
 
rudy235's Avatar
 
Jun 2015
Vallejo, CA/.

3CD16 Posts
Default

Booker says in the Video that (Minute 12:35) Heath Brown calculated that for this small numbers i.e ≤ 100. You would expect "the numbers from one solution to the next to increase by a factor of millions".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASoz_NuIvP0


Yet the numbers have increased only by one order of magnitude. (10)

So the question is this. Is this a completely off the chart finding? or are Heath Brown Calculations off base?

Video of "42" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyG8Vlw5aAw

Last fiddled with by rudy235 on 2019-09-06 at 23:21 Reason: Added video of 42
rudy235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-07, 03:07   #10
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

137038 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rudy235 View Post
So the question is this. Is this a completely off the chart finding? or are Heath Brown Calculations off base?
Yes. Or no. We don't know. One data point isn't going to tell you much of value here.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-09-07, 06:10   #11
rudy235
 
rudy235's Avatar
 
Jun 2015
Vallejo, CA/.

7×139 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Yes. Or no. We don't know. One data point isn't going to tell you much of value here.


That is a good answer, but it is also sort of an
Quote:
e-a-s-y answer.
We all know full well that one point is not enough to make good conclusions, we can agree on that, but... very early on in the sixties (60's) they went over 20 fold and did not find a new solution. And because of this, Heath Brown tried to figure what would happen along the line and concluded that 20-fold was not enough. He postulated a million-fold.

Now, he might be wrong, but if I were a betting man I would say he did as good analysis on the matter as could have been done at the time, and concluded that the sparsity was so intense that a 20-fold increase in the search would not normally produce a new result.

In other words, with the evidence we have as such, I am inclined to think this result for 42 is indeed an extraordinary and lucky result.

Of course, I may be totally wrong, but that is my feeling. (At least for now)

Last fiddled with by rudy235 on 2019-09-07 at 06:13 Reason: extra coma deleted
rudy235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 19:58.

Thu Mar 4 19:58:40 UTC 2021 up 91 days, 16:09, 0 users, load averages: 1.53, 1.48, 1.44

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.